Mumbai Resistance 2004

Workshop on Agriculture, WTO and Imperialism

THE ALTERNATIVE







BY



Gian Singh
National Convener
Kisani Pratishtha Manch


2
A Paper on WTO, Agriculture and imperialism
(WORLDVIEW AND COURSE OPEN TO HUMANITY)

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 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!

3
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 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 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

4
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 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.

5
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 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.

6
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 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 their kins. In their honest simplicity they

7
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 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.

8
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 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

9
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.
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.
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

10
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 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.

11
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 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

12
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 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.

13
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 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

14
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.
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.

15
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 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--

16
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 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 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

17
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 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.

18
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?
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

19
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. 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
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

20
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 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

21
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 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.

22
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.
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

23
behalf of a nation is merely another method to 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
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.

24
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 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

25
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 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.

26
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.
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 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. Compound interest be made a penal offence. All rural debt at present be
cancelled. No coercive methods for its recovery in any case be 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: 296-A/24 Jagdish Colony, Rohtak-124001 (Haryana) India
Tel. 01262-245615 Email: giansingh3@rediffmail.com