PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2007 ID-47740
.
.
' '" .
_, ') / _j_.
( "( -J (1,. -~/ .
Displacing Development and Developing Imperialism.
In the context of the policy initiatives of Liberallsation Prtvatisation and Globallsation undertaken by the Indian state-the.
present phase being euphemistically called the second generation reforms-the debate on the model of development has once.
again taken the central stage. A case is being made for a shift of focus from agriculture to the serv1ce sector ofthe economy as.
the main guarantor of employment. Learned as well as official views abound (as ln the often cited recent NSSO survey) that.
farm"ers voluntarily want to leave agriculture as their main .SOurce of income. Lack of provision of labour opportunities in.
agriculture for tbe bulk of the masses as required by the circumstances, diminishing returns from agriculture with a high input.
cOst and low market price 1support price for the output have provided little incentive for the peasantry to continue In the same.
productive activity. SEZs have become the solution for the agrarian stagnation cutting across states right from the much show.
cased 'Green Revolution' pockets to other regions which is still untouched by the capital intensive 'HYV-Fertiliser-Pesticide'.
policy. It has become the panacea for the looming spectre f unemployment; ostensibly the only way to prevent the increasing.
instances of suicide deaths of the peasantry. .
The growing discontent of small scale entrepreneurs in the mofussils and urban centres is the second dimension. 'Beautification'.
of urban spaces to cater to 'world standards' as suggested by global policy agencies like Mckinsey have forcefully vacated small.
and medium industries In cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Calcutta, Bangalore. The state daims that the opening up of the market.
would make the Industries In India more competitive to come up with cutting edge technologies. The small and medium.
producers believe that with the duty free, tax free, subsidised provisions for Investors in SEZs (read foreign enclaves) would.
finish off any little possibility that they had for producing goods that can sell at a cost effective price..
The plight of the tribal is the third unfolding dimension; being forcefully removed from their habitat, with the help of theparamilitary forces, moving with the district collector, industrialist, contractor for·facilitating building of huge dams for powergeneration and inigation·. Thus the Polavaram dam In Bhadrachalam, Andra Pradesh would displace more tha~ 2 lakh tribals,the largest in Asia. There are numerous Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) worth lakhs of crores of rupees signed by thegovernment with various Multi National Corporations (MNCs) and the domestic comprador capital for mining, oil exploration and.
setting up of industries such as coal and steel in states like Jharkhand, Orissa, Chhattisgarh. These states, the richest in terms.
of mineral and forest wealth have the poorest of people unable to get a square meal a day. In the maze of the publictty.
' blitzkrieg by the proponents of LPG, what Is carefully untold Is the question of development itself. The question as usual isdeliberately posed tn a manner wliere the pertinent aspects of the ramifications of a development model-that is totally reUanton foreign capital/dependent on imperialism-for the vast sections of the masses ofthis country hardly gets any mention..
poyertv ofcritiaue or poyerty ofthe critique ofooyerty: Many of the activists, academics (the leading lights being from.
JNU) and social commentators consider the present phase of development (Initiated through the second generation reforms of.
LPG) as the main cause of ruin of gains of the Nehruvian era. Central to this argument is the nostalgia of the Nehruvian plannedeconomy with the 'Modern Temples' like Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs), Big Dams for hyde! power generation and irrigationbeing the hallmark of development planning during this period. This approach primarily has a misleading notion of the mode of.
development that was unveiled soon after the transfer of power in India from the British. In this perception of development it.
becomes natural that despite the best efforts of the planned economy in the Nehruvlan period certain people, certain.
communities, still remain out of the loop of the 'fruits' of development. Neither development could reach these people nor do.
people embrace development. Development thus becomes a neutral category. No matter which class or state is promoting tt;.
technology can be provided by a 'socialist Soviet Union or a capitalist USA, so that development takes place. No matter who is.
getting benefited, development should be promoted as it will ultimately make the country prosper, stable and secure for.
everyone. At the end of the day, commonsense has it that the 'fruits' of development will reach-trickle down to-everyone,.
irrespective of caste, dass, nationality, religion and region. .
This perception, which is shared by the whole spectrum of the parliamentary parties, from the CPI, CPI (M) to the BJP, albeit.
with minor reservations, again exalts development to the status of a neutral category, shorn off the real class interests it J.
represents in space, time and structure. For this dominant opinion, development is thus possible in the urban centres because r.
'.there ls availability of capftal, market, and also Income so as to consume the products that are available in the market. Thus.
when the 1000 odd peasantry of anon-descript village, Ghori Bachera, in Nolda district, buy on the Dlwali day, last year, 200.
bikes and 60 cars and build huge houses out of the compensation money they received for the land exchanged for SEZ that also IT .
Is development as per the above notion. Conversely there is no or little development In the rural, tribal areas as In these social g.
realities there is little income generation to match the parity of the products available, besides low income 1 tow capital i.
formation has resulted in a skewed or total absence of the market In these social formations. Thus development gets reduced to ~.
presence or absence of capital, market, income. People become less important In this model. Itbecomes natural i.n thls model of.
development to come up with programmes like poverty alleviation, · Food for work, Rozgar Yojana, National Rural Employment.
Guarantee Schemes, etc. as externally induced initiatives to reach those sections who are out of the loop of the above .
.
1.
mentioned model as if these schemes are In itself external to the .
'notion of development..
.
Not only those people who become targets of these schemes are reduced to lifeless things, to be worked upon so as to be i~uplifted, even the onus of responsibility of not being part of the development promoted by the state falls on their shoulders. IImperialist capital leaves the imprint of Its own parasitic nature on those people who are easy targets of its logic of surplus p$1.
maximisation. Thus it be~omes easy for the cabinet minister to dismiss the shocking instance of tribals consummg poisonous .
~-~.
roo~ or grass to keep them altve as a 'natural' ~cultural' attribute of these people not In the habit of eating 'rice which is being.
provtded to them by the government. The fact that they are left out of the loop of the model of development imposed on them .
.
~I .
ff~1 .
4 .
... .
"--s-.
\ .
·.· .
.
PaRCha - JNU - All Organisations - 2007 ID-47740
.
.
' '" .
_, ') / _j_.
( "( -J (1,. -~/ .
Displacing Development and Developing Imperialism.
In the context of the policy initiatives of Liberallsation Prtvatisation and Globallsation undertaken by the Indian state-the.
present phase being euphemistically called the second generation reforms-the debate on the model of development has once.
again taken the central stage. A case is being made for a shift of focus from agriculture to the serv1ce sector ofthe economy as.
the main guarantor of employment. Learned as well as official views abound (as ln the often cited recent NSSO survey) that.
farm"ers voluntarily want to leave agriculture as their main .SOurce of income. Lack of provision of labour opportunities in.
agriculture for tbe bulk of the masses as required by the circumstances, diminishing returns from agriculture with a high input.
cOst and low market price 1support price for the output have provided little incentive for the peasantry to continue In the same.
productive activity. SEZs have become the solution for the agrarian stagnation cutting across states right from the much show.
cased 'Green Revolution' pockets to other regions which is still untouched by the capital intensive 'HYV-Fertiliser-Pesticide'.
policy. It has become the panacea for the looming spectre f unemployment; ostensibly the only way to prevent the increasing.
instances of suicide deaths of the peasantry. .
The growing discontent of small scale entrepreneurs in the mofussils and urban centres is the second dimension. 'Beautification'.
of urban spaces to cater to 'world standards' as suggested by global policy agencies like Mckinsey have forcefully vacated small.
and medium industries In cities like Delhi, Mumbai, Calcutta, Bangalore. The state daims that the opening up of the market.
would make the Industries In India more competitive to come up with cutting edge technologies. The small and medium.
producers believe that with the duty free, tax free, subsidised provisions for Investors in SEZs (read foreign enclaves) would.
finish off any little possibility that they had for producing goods that can sell at a cost effective price..
The plight of the tribal is the third unfolding dimension; being forcefully removed from their habitat, with the help of theparamilitary forces, moving with the district collector, industrialist, contractor for·facilitating building of huge dams for powergeneration and inigation·. Thus the Polavaram dam In Bhadrachalam, Andra Pradesh would displace more tha~ 2 lakh tribals,the largest in Asia. There are numerous Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) worth lakhs of crores of rupees signed by thegovernment with various Multi National Corporations (MNCs) and the domestic comprador capital for mining, oil exploration and.
setting up of industries such as coal and steel in states like Jharkhand, Orissa, Chhattisgarh. These states, the richest in terms.
of mineral and forest wealth have the poorest of people unable to get a square meal a day. In the maze of the publictty.
' blitzkrieg by the proponents of LPG, what Is carefully untold Is the question of development itself. The question as usual isdeliberately posed tn a manner wliere the pertinent aspects of the ramifications of a development model-that is totally reUanton foreign capital/dependent on imperialism-for the vast sections of the masses ofthis country hardly gets any mention..
poyertv ofcritiaue or poyerty ofthe critique ofooyerty: Many of the activists, academics (the leading lights being from.
JNU) and social commentators consider the present phase of development (Initiated through the second generation reforms of.
LPG) as the main cause of ruin of gains of the Nehruvian era. Central to this argument is the nostalgia of the Nehruvian plannedeconomy with the 'Modern Temples' like Public Sector Undertakings (PSUs), Big Dams for hyde! power generation and irrigationbeing the hallmark of development planning during this period. This approach primarily has a misleading notion of the mode of.
development that was unveiled soon after the transfer of power in India from the British. In this perception of development it.
becomes natural that despite the best efforts of the planned economy in the Nehruvlan period certain people, certain.
communities, still remain out of the loop of the 'fruits' of development. Neither development could reach these people nor do.
people embrace development. Development thus becomes a neutral category. No matter which class or state is promoting tt;.
technology can be provided by a 'socialist Soviet Union or a capitalist USA, so that development takes place. No matter who is.
getting benefited, development should be promoted as it will ultimately make the country prosper, stable and secure for.
everyone. At the end of the day, commonsense has it that the 'fruits' of development will reach-trickle down to-everyone,.
irrespective of caste, dass, nationality, religion and region. .
This perception, which is shared by the whole spectrum of the parliamentary parties, from the CPI, CPI (M) to the BJP, albeit.
with minor reservations, again exalts development to the status of a neutral category, shorn off the real class interests it J.
represents in space, time and structure. For this dominant opinion, development is thus possible in the urban centres because r.
'.there ls availability of capftal, market, and also Income so as to consume the products that are available in the market. Thus.
when the 1000 odd peasantry of anon-descript village, Ghori Bachera, in Nolda district, buy on the Dlwali day, last year, 200.
bikes and 60 cars and build huge houses out of the compensation money they received for the land exchanged for SEZ that also IT .
Is development as per the above notion. Conversely there is no or little development In the rural, tribal areas as In these social g.
realities there is little income generation to match the parity of the products available, besides low income 1 tow capital i.
formation has resulted in a skewed or total absence of the market In these social formations. Thus development gets reduced to ~.
presence or absence of capital, market, income. People become less important In this model. Itbecomes natural i.n thls model of.
development to come up with programmes like poverty alleviation, · Food for work, Rozgar Yojana, National Rural Employment.
Guarantee Schemes, etc. as externally induced initiatives to reach those sections who are out of the loop of the above .
.
1.
mentioned model as if these schemes are In itself external to the .
'notion of development..
.
Not only those people who become targets of these schemes are reduced to lifeless things, to be worked upon so as to be i~uplifted, even the onus of responsibility of not being part of the development promoted by the state falls on their shoulders. IImperialist capital leaves the imprint of Its own parasitic nature on those people who are easy targets of its logic of surplus p$1.
maximisation. Thus it be~omes easy for the cabinet minister to dismiss the shocking instance of tribals consummg poisonous .
~-~.
roo~ or grass to keep them altve as a 'natural' ~cultural' attribute of these people not In the habit of eating 'rice which is being.
provtded to them by the government. The fact that they are left out of the loop of the model of development imposed on them .
.
~I .
ff~1 .
4 .
... .
"--s-.
\ .
·.· .
.