Calcutta Notebook
DRC

The bhadralok are scandalized by the talkings and doings of the CM and her cohorts. Even the Rajyapal, a former star of the policing and intelligence community, is pained at the goondaism. Whose goondaism he does not specify, but you are less than a p. cretin if you miss the message behind the lines. The very leaders of the Congress, who shared knives with the 'anti-socials' they now denounce, on the killing asphalt of Calcutta 1971, threaten to call for Art 356 to oust the elected government, without the CPI(M) lodging, today, any adverse comments on this doctrine which their government had steadfastly opposed. The wily leaders of the CPI(M) actually feel indebted to the CM for allowing attacks on Rezzak Molla sahib. The consequent dissatisfaction has stirred up fresh hope among despondent members and sympathizers of the party, from almost forgotten former celebrities to the Harmads and skeleton buriers of Nandigram, Haldia, Keshpur-Garbeta, Netai and Chhoto Angria—fresh hope of another innings of jobbery and thuggery, tasting, this time, moreover, of the sweet, red juice of revenge. Even more, the pedlars, within the party, of the theory of TINA to big capital, whose influence had been on the wane among the cadre, who rightly held TINA politics responsible for the unbelievable debacle faced by party, are again showing their faces in the front row of leaders. The Congress was never forgiven by the people for the Emergency which lasted two years. It is to be seen if the CPI(M) is forgiven so soon for an undeclared Emergency which lasted for the latter and greater part of 34 years.

The bhadralok are surprised, most of all those who expected much from the ‘paribartan’. Why, pray? If you build up expectations about a party whose leaders have never expressed regrets about their active role in the ‘excesses’ of the Emergency, and unabashedly accepted as their mentor a man who administered the wholesale killing of Bengali and Panjabi youth, justifying his trampling over constitutional rights by the alleged terrorism of what he himself described as a handful of misguided youth; if you build such castles in the air, you have only yourself to blame when your expectations are not fulfilled and your castles crumble. Voting for the most viable opposition party against an anti-people, pro-big capital, authoritarian regime is rational, if the people's movement demands that a new government be voted in. But it is highly likely that such parties represent classes and forces inimical to the interests of the working people, and instant withdrawal once the objective is attained is good policy. In any case, change of government has never brought any fundamental change in the economy and polity of this country. A political alliance or understanding with such parties, beyond a simple coincidence in the pattern of voting on election day, may be suicidal, as instantly taught by these forces in the jangalmahal. The 'other' bhadralok, who voted for none or for the CPI(M), are looking complacent, their entire deportment whispering "We told you so." Much can be said. It is sufficient to ask these bhadralok whether an electoral victory for the CPI(M) would have given a more democratic governance on January 9, 2013.

One has faced a notoriety of sorts because of one's view that the alliance for the fight against big capital and its effort to introduce a fascism of sorts in the state of West Bengal through the CPI(M), should include the TMC, right up to election day, but not one day after the swearing-in of the TMC. With trepidation, it will now be suggested that in the fight which has developed, this time, between the TMC on the one hand and the CPI(M)-Congress-media baron axis, on the other, there is no call for those who consider themselves Leftists to ally themselves with either formation.

What are the class forces in action now? The government is supported firmly by the big and middle farmers, those business men and traders, who are less than big enough for the national market and, consequently have a constant eye on the state market, the unemployed and self-employed youth. These classes and strata had also been solidly behind the CPI(M) party before its Salome dance in front of the Tatas, Jindals, Goenkas, Frito-Lay, Metro Cash and Carry, and British capital. The support base of the CPI(M), at the time, included much of the bhadralok "class", too, i.e. salaried employees, labour leaders, and that mainly hidden iceberg of professionals and intellectuals who needed the security of patronage. Industrial workers, poor peasants and rural labour, small businessmen and traders were made to support their richer or more powerful brethren/leaders in exchange for a patriarchal, though strictly partisan, eye on their wants. As corruption, jobbery, and defalcation of the entitlements of the toiling people, organized by local-level satraps with the blessing of the chhote-nawabs and the silent, deaf and unseeing compliance of the CC and the PB, became rampant, the government's legitimacy among the toilers eroded away, and the moment the land question erupted, the peasantry made a solid, hostile block under the leadership of the middle to big farmers, the workers silently sabotaged the electoral prospects of the gaddar leaders, and, appalled by the party-led frank state violence, murder and rape, let loose as the rulers' hegemony expired, a section of the intellectuals, including a number of those who felt that they had been passed over unjustly, changed sides loudly and flamboyantly, to lend a false reddish hue of ‘leftness’ to what looked attractively like a rainbow-coloured lack of doctrine. Finally, as this coalition started to look electorally viable, the petty bourgeoisie and the lumpen proletariat shifted sides with their characteristic opportunism, and the CPI(M) was done for electorally. But its partisan scattering of largesse from out of what was, in any case, earmarked for the poor, had bought loyalty or, at least, a belief that a TMC rule could not last long. The long-oppressed minorities changed sides deliberately this time, but apart from communities dominated by the major religious and caste minorities or hailing from former areas of frank party-led state violence, some half of the toiling people, who had visited the polling booths, remained with the CPI(M), at least electorally.

Neither the losers, nor the victors, understood that this rejection at the hustings was a rejection by the people of pro-big capital policies, the anti-people character of which is always coloured, moreover, by increasingly fascist modes of governance. The CPI(M) blamed its government, for example, for wrong 'method' in land grabbing, while testifying to the correctness of the party's basic thesis on the need for land grabbing to present big capital with an attractive package (attractive, that is, to big capital). Insofar as this party continues to justify such anti-people policies and methods, derived from subservience to big capital, it remains a target of the people and not a political ally. Of course, it is an opposition party, and local and temporary alliances will always be springing up. But, the people recognize the political portrait of a party by concrete summation of observed policies and events, seldom recognized as crucial by the leaders of the party. The CPI(M) remains puzzled by the strength, durability, and continuation of the people's dislike for their local bullies and spokesmen, spontaneously reaching, in many places, a social rejection, just this side of the aggressive social boycott preached by some TMC stalwarts.

Even the CM has not appreciated this basic rejection by the people of policies which depend solely on investment by big capital. The TMC tank of ideas remains formally wedded to such a leading role of big capital. On January 10, 2013, for example, she declared (a)SAIL would build at Durgapur the second largest steel plant in the world, and (b) Lakhs of young people would get jobs.

As for (a), SAIL may keep its promise or it may not. But, one thing is definite, (b) does not follow from (a). This is the lesson someone did not learn from Singur. Tata would have invested Rs 1000 crore for 700 workers only and there would have been at most 5000 workers in ancillaries. Haldia Petrochemicals and all its downstream industries provided in its heyday 3,200 jobs in-plant and 14,000 at most downstream. Every year there are more than 13 lakh new job-seekers in Bengal. Even if fairy tales become true and SAIL comes and even if 1 lakh jobs are created in-plant and downstream, every year the CM would have to fetch 13 SAILs to start factories. In fact, more - because, once it starts, after suitably short periods of time, a modern factory sheds staff-flab to become more 'lean and thin'.

The economics of development through capital-intensive investment in the era of modern capitalism specifically excludes the problem of inequality, and so ignores the economic state of the toilers, apart from a child-like belief in the Santa Claus of 'trickle-down', and in an altruistic state which will, who knows why, wave the magic wand of an education policy which will, who knows how, create, not only employable people, but also employment. Neo-classical economics is laughably naive, and wrong economics leads to wrong politics.

In practice, the logic of modern capitalism in a backward country (backward from the view-point of capital), with some presence in and much ambition about world markets, entails the inevitability of severe unemployment—jobs and wages are frozen to survive and prosper in the bitter competition which is the substance below all the superficial talk of co-operation floated by globalization. Capital is for new capital-intensive investment and new surplus to win stake-outs in cut-throat markets, not for providing jobs to losers.

The Kolkata newspaper giant, which is consistent in its symbiotic support to the cause of big capital, has returned to seeking a champion to the cause in the Buddha-Nirupam brand of camp followers of capital. Its TV channel went to town on the snub to the state government, administered by the absence of the leaders of capital in India at the bash with the rather hopeful name of "Bengal Leads." The reply to the snub should have been:

1.    The major economic problem of Bengal is unemployment, and, so,
2.   Nobody cares for the tantrums of big capital, because their investment is jobless.
Instead, the TMC camp, including the CM, clearly exhibited its disappointment by trying too hard to wear a brave face. They sang Rabindranath's ‘Akla cholo re’!

The sense of inadequacy felt by the TMC arose from its formal endorsement of an idea of development at the heart of which lies big investment by big capital. However, at every face to face meeting with big capital, the improvised words of the CM and her body language express a struggle for dominance. But, this spontaneous unease fails to gel into a political realization because the globalised tablets of theory prepared by neo-classical obfuscation for their respectful ingestion have taught Indian politicians one economics, while common sense and grassroots experience dictate something else. If some-one gives some importance to the latter, both she and big capital are at a loss.

Both protagonists in this struggle within the camp of big capital agree to what is the material policy, the investment. But there remains a sea of difference in the principle of implementation, the ideology, if you accept such bombast. It is natural for big capital to dictate rules to governments, their experience is that politicians spout ideology because under its shelter they want something improper, and fall in line when they get it (it is seldom a direct bribe). Up to now, Mamata Bandyo-padhyay has insisted that big capital must obey her rules. If they are to be broken that, too, must carry her approval. Big capital first thought that this was naivete mixed with a new ploy for much impropriety. Then they thought this was ideology. Now, they are thinking it is paranoia. If the CM insists on her primogeniture, they will come to chink, as the Kolkata press giant already does, that the ruddy Marxists were better, and, maybe it was time to give a look-see whether they had learnt to govern better and serve better. And people will see real blood-letting if that happens. But, fact is, till date, the oustees have learnt nothing (and forgotten nothing).

Of course, the TMC might fall in line with other favour-mongers from big capital. Bigger swerves are made by politicians every day. Although, there are as yet no alarm signals of this kind, defence and policing policies of the Union are actively pursued in the state, insofar as they strengthen the TMC vis a vis competitors. Witness, the convergence of Union and state, Congress, TMC, BJP, and CPI(M) in retaining the paramilitary occupation forces in the jangalmahal, and building a bodyguard force to promote pro-Writers politicking on government salary.

Because the prevalent paradigm is not questioned, a distrust-dependence see-saw prevents the emergence of a deliberate search for a policy independent of big capital investment. The socio-economic policies actually followed are eclectic, representing the opinions and prejudices of the voter catchment of the TMC, and do not as yet contain any glaringly pro-big capital programmes. Opposition to price or fare rise in any sector, blocking big foreign chains from entering the retail trade, a land sale policy somewhat biased to safeguard sellers and the displaced, government control over panchayat spending, attempt to buy grain directly from farmers (without, however, building adequate public purchase infrastructure), flogging exhausted ground-water irrigation (the rich farmer buys a pump and hires it out, accompanied by little government expenditure) instead of government investment in the unutilized 40% of surface water capacity (in the latter case, the poor peasant, too, can be a beneficiary if channels are cut to accommodate him in addition to his richer neighbours), intolerance of criticism, especially from civil society, harassment of CPI(M) and, now, all non-TMC incumbents in government-sponsored posts, with removal from such posts where possible, toleration of corruption and small-scale extortion, and armed protection and supply rackets in real estate(the material reason behind the aggressive suppression of the Nonadanga homeless), lack of urgency in protecting women under the perception that 'flashy' women are raped, a prejudice of the social strata supporting the TMC, and partisan use of the police force and the bureaucracy, entailing, on the one hand, toleration of their failings and alleged delinquencies, and high-handed contempt, on the other.

The CM is concerned only with satisfying her voters, and, in doing so, ipso facto upholds their class interests. And, make no mistake, they worship her. They go into fits of laughter when she takes intellectual types down a peg or two. Each of her actions, so unacceptable to the bhadralok, convinces her voters that she is with them, for them, and of them. This explains her complete negation of all independent aspirations of the working class and the rural poor, and the toleration of only one relation, the Spanish one of patron and peon, or the British one of master and dependant (in legal parlance, master and servant). The only good poorman is a subservient poorrman. This is why this government can be un-understandably cruel to the homeless of Nonadanga, and the CM might be surprised and indignant, if someone insisted that the people of the interior villages in the jangalmahal are intensely unhappy.

It is patently unfair to denigrate without offering an alternative. But, I see the editor switching on the red light, and shall content myself with the indicaticon that such a policy exists [EPW, 31.3.2009].

Big investment cannot even begin to solve the problem of livelihood and employment. Small-scale investment creates many more jobs but, apart from its own problems of survival, its capacity of job-creation is roughly one-tenth of that which is needed. What is left is the sector of the economy abandoned by Buddha-Nirupam-type agriculture. The sharp eyes of Swaminathan, an indefatigable scout for the fertiliser giants of the world, have seen the power concealed inside Bengal's agriculture. Pointing out the low use of fertiliser in Bengal compared to that in the Punjab, from the podium of the Science Congress held in Kolkata, he called Bengal, Bihar and Assam, the sleeping tigers of Indian agriculture. There are studies which provide adequate evidence to show that in Bengal, at least, the kingpin for reviving agriculture is surface water (not fertilisers). Proper surface irrigation itself can increase the GDP of the agriculture sector by an amount equal to the GDP of the manufacturing sector. The same studies showed the importance of another factor—literacy. This sounds something like a lucky spell until we put it together with the way the rich farmers and the bureaucracy have defeated the purpose of NREG by turning it into a charitable scheme for the creation of unplanned and unproductive assets. A scheme like NREG carries great potential only if it is run by Gram Sansads/(/Sabhas) led by the rural toilers, literate, alert, aware, and unafraid.

Frontier
Vol. 45, No. 38, Mar31-Apr 6, 2013

Your Comment if any