Politics & Socialism
Source: By Rajindar Sachar: The Statesman
The country is going through a chaotic phase in the aftermath of the Assembly elections in five states, most particularly the result in Delhi. We will soon be going through a similar exercise when the Lok Sabha elections are held. The mainstream parties are expected to prove to the voters that they have honestly tried to abide by the mandate of the Constitution that envisages a Socialist Republic. And if the question is posed to the electorate, the answer, regretfully, will be in the negative.
Diehard pro-capitalist apologists in our social set-up try to laugh at this commitment by suggesting that the expression, Socialism, was not incorporated in the Constitution in 1950, but was inserted later through an amendment in 1975 and has no relevance in post-1990 India.
It is precisely the failure of the advocates of globalisation and opening up of the economy that is responsible for the country’s present misery. Article 39(b) of the Constitution was always understood to mean that we have to endeavour to set up a socialist society. This has been explained specifically by Dr BR Ambedkar in reply to Professor KT Shah who wanted ‘socialism’ to be incorporated in the Constitution at the drafting stage. Dr Ambedkar, while expressing his inability to do so for technical reasons, explained that socialism as such had already been incorporated in the Directive Principles of State Policy. He said: “If these Directive Principles to which I have drawn attention are not socialistic in their direction and content, I fail to understand what more socialism can be. Therefore, my submission is that these socialist principles are already embodied in our Constitution and it is unnecessary to accept this amendment.”
The same conclusion was repeated in 1983 by the Supreme Court ~ “Though the word ‘socialism’ was introduced into the Preamble by a late amendment of the Constitution that socialism has always been the goal is evident from the Directive Principles of State Policy. The amendment was only to emphasise the urgency.” Logically, therefore, if the government fails to pursue the socialist path, it will be held guilty of violating its constitutional obligations.
The misplaced faith of those who still continue to believe that the development of the Indian economy can follow the false premise of globalization, ignores the warning given by respectable economists even of the USA. They have highlighted two ominous developments ~ one in the financial realm and the other relating to the real economy.
To talk against globalization in the well-cloistered confines of the government and corporate sector is almost regarded as treason. Let me quote Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Laureate economist who, in his book published in 2006, is very critical about the assumed benefits of globalization. He writes: “Globalization is neither socially benign nor has it been instrumental in reducing poverty. Globalization has been detrimental to the poor and other weaker sections of society. Globalization policies have been responsible for many ills of the global financial crisis and loss of employment as inefficient industries closed down under the pressure from international competition.”
There is a lesson to be drawn from the economic crisis in the USA and Europe, specifically that the oligarchic financial institutions were chiefly responsible for the mess. Multinational banks, notably Citi bank and Goldman Sachs, are responsible for damaging the US economy because of their greed and profit-oriented policies. The rescue operation, carried out by the US Government and its Treasury department clearly exposes the orchestrated efficiency of the private sector over the public. The latest financial disaster in the USA relates to JP Morgan and Chase Bank, the largest in the country in terms of assets. They are facing multiple investigations and $ 5.8. billion loss owing to wrong bets on credit derivatives. Some well-known American banks are suspected to have rigged interest rates or were involved in money-laundering. Ironically, the UPA government still feels that the unregulated entry of foreign banks into Indian markets is the primary benchmark of growth.
Almost on bended knees, the government invokes the assistance from foreign multinationals and apparently justifies it on the ground that we do not have sufficient financial resources for development and therefore need foreign capital. How mischievously wrong! According to the Commerce Minister, only about $ 250 billion (approximately Rs 12 lakh crore) have been received over the past ten years. As against this, “the top 500 listed companies have enough cash to double India’s power generation capacity of 200,000 MW or build over 40,000 km of six-lane highways every year (compared with the current 800 km), but are refusing to invest because of slow economic growth that has been aggravated by policy paralysis. At the end of fiscal year 31 March 2012, these companies were sitting on cash and cash equivalent ~ the legend investments that can easily be converted to cash ~ of over Rs 9.3 lakh crore or $160 billion.”
India is definitely not shining and this is clear from the Human Development Report released by the Planning Commission in October 2011. It reveals the widening gap between rich and poor. “In India, the distribution of assets is extremely unequal, with the top 5 per cent of the households possessing 38 per cent of the total assets and the bottom 60 per cent of households owning a mere 13 per cent”. Just 66 resident billionaires in India control assets worth more than a fifth of the country’s GDP. Capital at large is three times more concentrated than in the United States.
If the main parties continue to violate the mandate of the Constitution, they must reflect on Dr Ambedkar’s words of caution while winding up the debate in the Constituent Assembly. The occasion was to approve the Constitution. He said: “We are going to enter a life of contradictions. In politics, we will have equality and in social and economic life, we will have inequality. We must remove this contradiction at the earliest possible moment or else those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of political democracy which this Assembly has so laboriously constructed.” That warning, I submit, is as urgent as it is relevant in 2013.
The country is going through a chaotic phase in the aftermath of the Assembly elections in five states, most particularly the result in Delhi. We will soon be going through a similar exercise when the Lok Sabha elections are held. The mainstream parties are expected to prove to the voters that they have honestly tried to abide by the mandate of the Constitution that envisages a Socialist Republic. And if the question is posed to the electorate, the answer, regretfully, will be in the negative.
Diehard pro-capitalist apologists in our social set-up try to laugh at this commitment by suggesting that the expression, Socialism, was not incorporated in the Constitution in 1950, but was inserted later through an amendment in 1975 and has no relevance in post-1990 India.
It is precisely the failure of the advocates of globalisation and opening up of the economy that is responsible for the country’s present misery. Article 39(b) of the Constitution was always understood to mean that we have to endeavour to set up a socialist society. This has been explained specifically by Dr BR Ambedkar in reply to Professor KT Shah who wanted ‘socialism’ to be incorporated in the Constitution at the drafting stage. Dr Ambedkar, while expressing his inability to do so for technical reasons, explained that socialism as such had already been incorporated in the Directive Principles of State Policy. He said: “If these Directive Principles to which I have drawn attention are not socialistic in their direction and content, I fail to understand what more socialism can be. Therefore, my submission is that these socialist principles are already embodied in our Constitution and it is unnecessary to accept this amendment.”
The same conclusion was repeated in 1983 by the Supreme Court ~ “Though the word ‘socialism’ was introduced into the Preamble by a late amendment of the Constitution that socialism has always been the goal is evident from the Directive Principles of State Policy. The amendment was only to emphasise the urgency.” Logically, therefore, if the government fails to pursue the socialist path, it will be held guilty of violating its constitutional obligations.
The misplaced faith of those who still continue to believe that the development of the Indian economy can follow the false premise of globalization, ignores the warning given by respectable economists even of the USA. They have highlighted two ominous developments ~ one in the financial realm and the other relating to the real economy.
To talk against globalization in the well-cloistered confines of the government and corporate sector is almost regarded as treason. Let me quote Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Laureate economist who, in his book published in 2006, is very critical about the assumed benefits of globalization. He writes: “Globalization is neither socially benign nor has it been instrumental in reducing poverty. Globalization has been detrimental to the poor and other weaker sections of society. Globalization policies have been responsible for many ills of the global financial crisis and loss of employment as inefficient industries closed down under the pressure from international competition.”
There is a lesson to be drawn from the economic crisis in the USA and Europe, specifically that the oligarchic financial institutions were chiefly responsible for the mess. Multinational banks, notably Citi bank and Goldman Sachs, are responsible for damaging the US economy because of their greed and profit-oriented policies. The rescue operation, carried out by the US Government and its Treasury department clearly exposes the orchestrated efficiency of the private sector over the public. The latest financial disaster in the USA relates to JP Morgan and Chase Bank, the largest in the country in terms of assets. They are facing multiple investigations and $ 5.8. billion loss owing to wrong bets on credit derivatives. Some well-known American banks are suspected to have rigged interest rates or were involved in money-laundering. Ironically, the UPA government still feels that the unregulated entry of foreign banks into Indian markets is the primary benchmark of growth.
Almost on bended knees, the government invokes the assistance from foreign multinationals and apparently justifies it on the ground that we do not have sufficient financial resources for development and therefore need foreign capital. How mischievously wrong! According to the Commerce Minister, only about $ 250 billion (approximately Rs 12 lakh crore) have been received over the past ten years. As against this, “the top 500 listed companies have enough cash to double India’s power generation capacity of 200,000 MW or build over 40,000 km of six-lane highways every year (compared with the current 800 km), but are refusing to invest because of slow economic growth that has been aggravated by policy paralysis. At the end of fiscal year 31 March 2012, these companies were sitting on cash and cash equivalent ~ the legend investments that can easily be converted to cash ~ of over Rs 9.3 lakh crore or $160 billion.”
India is definitely not shining and this is clear from the Human Development Report released by the Planning Commission in October 2011. It reveals the widening gap between rich and poor. “In India, the distribution of assets is extremely unequal, with the top 5 per cent of the households possessing 38 per cent of the total assets and the bottom 60 per cent of households owning a mere 13 per cent”. Just 66 resident billionaires in India control assets worth more than a fifth of the country’s GDP. Capital at large is three times more concentrated than in the United States.
If the main parties continue to violate the mandate of the Constitution, they must reflect on Dr Ambedkar’s words of caution while winding up the debate in the Constituent Assembly. The occasion was to approve the Constitution. He said: “We are going to enter a life of contradictions. In politics, we will have equality and in social and economic life, we will have inequality. We must remove this contradiction at the earliest possible moment or else those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of political democracy which this Assembly has so laboriously constructed.” That warning, I submit, is as urgent as it is relevant in 2013.
No comments:
Post a Comment