UNDERLYING ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF MOVEMENTS
AND INEQUALITY
Arun Kumar
CESP/SSS, JNU.
Published in Chaubey, N.P., Panda, D. and Pant, G.
(Ed.) Peoples’ Struggles and Movements for Equitable Society. Allahabad :
ISSA and N Delhi, DAANISH Books.
I. SOCIETAL
PROCESSES RESULTING IN GROWING INEQUALITY
There are myriad causes of
inequity and inequality in society that are built into the prevailing social
system. Hence working to change a few of these based on a partial understanding
will not lead to the desired change towards equity or equality. A holistic
vision is necessary whose various features are briefly sketched out in this
article. It would have to include cultural, environmental, linguistic,
economic, political, historical, sociological, legal, scientific and
technological and other such aspects. Since this is a vast terrain for any
paper to cover, the focus will be on the underlying economic aspects of
inequality as they effect these dimensions of the problem and thereby reinforce
social inequality.
In
the dominant economic framework of the market, only lip service is paid to the
idea of equity – distribution is not on the agenda of policy making. Only what
is called `efficiency’, defined as the attainment of optimality in the markets
is discussed (See Any basic Public Finance text book, like, Tresch, 1981). That
is why the notion of `trickle down’ and growth as a means of eliminating
poverty are the main features of discussion in development literature but not
equality or equity.
While economics does not
determine everything in society, it has become the single most important
feature of social existence and this is due to changes at the philosophical
plane. This would also help us understand why there has been growing acceptance
of social inequality. At the conceptual/philosophical
plane we need to be clear what we understand by people’s movements and equitable society. Further, why the former
maybe a pre requisite for the emergence of the latter? Alternatively, one may
ask whether equity or equality can be automatically achieved in society, that
is, can they be the natural state of society?
People are born equal with
the same social potentialities that anyone else has but it is in terms of their
social existence that they become unequal. As they grow up, typically, the
differentiation only grows. If this is so, differentiation
is not a natural state of affairs but has a large social content? While
genetic factors are different for each individual that only determines the
innate abilities which may flower given the support and opportunities in life.
It is this support in the form of education and health and other opportunities
that depend on the nature of society and what view one takes of the individual and of social differentiation. The
social position of individuals is determined by their role in society and not
by nature. Even if there are natural differences amongst different people, it
depends on society to decide whether they would be treated as equal or if not, how
unequally.
Society’s
view of Man determines how unequally
different people are treated and this is itself based on the social strata
they belong to and where in the hierarchy it is placed. The dominant sections
decide on who gets what status and for their own benefit create hierarchies.
This is justified as natural division to lend legitimacy to their view of
society. Their sense of `justice’ is also based on this view of society. For
instance, in a feudal society, to justify hierarchies, there is an inherent
view of people as unequal. In a capitalist society that appears to have changed
but inequity based on ownership of capital is taken to be natural and just.
Structurally, there is more inequity between capital and labour than amongst
wage earners but most of the discussion is on the latter.
*Based on the paper of the same title presented in the 31st
Indian Social Science Congress in Mumbai in 2007.
II. NATURE
OF GROWING INEQUITIES
II.1 Philosophical
components of inequality and inequity
Inequality and inequity are
linked to the state of society, its institutions and its sense of justice. In
turn these determine the link with nature of exploitation in that society and
what role continuation of inequality plays in that society. For continuing
inequality, the ruling groups are important and they maintain their control over the rest through an
ideological hegemony.
The notion of justice in a society also emerges from the ideological
hegemony. This hegemony has its impact on the oppressed or the ones considered
lesser in the system. They are blinded to the obvious ills of the system and to
the link of that with their own situation. They believe that there is no alternative and that this
is the natural state of affairs. Hence even they consider it to be just and
accept it. Thus, under feudalism, the serfs also had aspirations to be a
landlord and thought it to be natural that they would be serfs under the
landlord and give him the labour of their toil. Under capitalism the workers
believe that they would one day be the owners of capital. So, under capitalism,
even workers TURN capitalists in their belief. The spread of the stock market
habit in the West and even in the developing world makes the oppressed believe
that they are also capitalists.
In the present day male
dominated world, successful women also
adopt the male centric values of society and consider this to be the
natural state of affairs. Most do not feel that they can or need to evolve a
different set of values or different structures that would not exploit the
weak. Powerful successful women like Indira Gandhi, Bandaranayke, Bhutto,
Sheikh Hasina, Zia, in South Asia have made
little impact on the position of women in society and continued or even
furthered the oppressive systems in their countries. Ms. Thatcher made little
difference in UK or little is expected from Ms. Merekel in present day Germany
Similarly, in the Indian caste ridden society,
the oppressed, the Dalits have adopted
upper caste values. While they were denied entry into temples, they instead
of creating their own structures demanded entry to these very temples. The
successful have also oppressed the others rather than evolving an alternative
structure of power. Even though they have been oppressed by feudalism and
capitalism they have when in positions of power hardly behaved differently.
Change comes through change in social consciousness
and not just through the good intentions
of the ruler. Those in power try to maintain their position and that implies
maintaining a balance between the ruling forces. Thus, change has to come
despite what those in power want. It requires the bulk of society to force the
change on the rulers because they begin to believe in something different. This
change in social thinking comes through movements and struggles that change the
consciousness of society as a whole. Many an idea exist in society but do not
get taken up till the time comes when they become acceptable because
consciousness changes. Gandhi succeeded in the national movement leading to
independence but not in getting rid of untouchability. The time for the former
had come because the bourgeoisie put its weight behind the idea of independence
but for the latter, society was not yet ready and is perhaps still not ready.
In Europe, feudal values and ways have given way to
capitalist ones. Manual work is not
considered to be degrading. Households clean their own houses and toilets. Most
do their own basic plumbing and electrical work or even carpentry and painting
of their house. In India
The failure of the Environmental movement over decades is
because it has not yet succeeded in checking consumerism. In Europe ,
despite Green movements, consumption per head continues to grow leading to use
of ever more resources and putting an ever growing load on Nature. Temporary
scares over ozone hole are dealt with through technological fixes without the realization that that only puts
off the day of reckoning and possibly the tipping point will come sooner than
later since new problems result from newer untested and untried technologies.
Society does not have the time today to test the technology over a period of
time to see what ill effects it may have. Too many changes taking place
simultaneously create the confusion that what may appear to be acceptable in an
isolated instance may not be so when coupled with others.
Perhaps a distinction needs to be made between
struggles and movements. The former are more localized and the latter more
generalized. The finer points of distinction may be understood through application
of political and sociological theory? Pure economic theory (as it is referred
to today) has little to say on this but political economy would also suggest
that such a distinction in understanding needs to be maintained if we are to
understand social processes. Unfortunately, in common parlance these
distinctions are glossed over and the two terms are used interchangeably.
The process of social understanding is considerably
hampered by the way knowledge is
split up between disciplines. In Economics, students have little
understanding of history or social processes. As Samuelson lamented in 1986,
for students, economics begins in 1980 with game theory. For many, proving
mathematical theorems is all that matters since social processes can be reduced
to statistics or variables. That social processes are not deterministic and use
of mathematics or techniques based on that have a limited role is not understood
by many in the field of economics. Even in the natural sciences, it is an axiom
that one studies the world as it exists
and not a hypothetical one since then there would be an infinity of them
and there would be no basis of discussion amongst the scientists. The social
scientists have also to agree that they must study the world as it is and not a
hypothetical one based on their assumptions which only enable them to use the
statistical and mathematical tools. The limits of these techniques in
understanding social processes are immaterial for a large number of economists
of the present day. That their results are based on specific assumptions and do
not have a universal validity is glossed over. Due to their distance from
reality, they end up providing justification to the ruling elite for what it is
wanting to do in its own interest.
The process of fragmentation of knowledge is aided by the
methodological splitting up of the social sciences into different
disciplines and sub-disciplines. Within Economics, the neo-classical school has
little idea of the classical ideas or the political economy, etc. Professional
training for management, engineering, etc., is devoid of wider social
questioning because it is deliberately designed to leave little time for wider
reflection. This process needs to be reversed through building a unity of
knowledge and learning and introduction of inter-disciplinarity rather than
multi-disciplinarity promoted in its name.
The consequence of this splitting up of the social
understanding is that non-solutions
abound and a holistic vision of Society and Nature is hard to build. That
is why while solving one problem, we end up creating many more and problems get
compounded. Often mistakes are realized too late for them to be corrected so
one ends up accepting them and only reducing their ill effect rather than
eliminating the root cause of the problem.
The
lack of a holistic vision results in the creation of non-solutions for the
problems facing society. What is being done at one stage of development may be
proposed as a solution for a society at a different stage of development. This
is true of urbanization, mechanization and automation in production, etc. Thus,
while trying to solve a problem several others arise and need further
solutions, etc.
Education can
play a large role in creating a wider understanding but today it is alienating
for large sections of the population. It has largely become a source of
replicating the system as it exists rather than posing a challenge to it to
make society a better place. Most students are narrowly concerned with a career
and the teachers think of their job as any other and show limited commitment.
The space for what education should be has been ceded by the intellectuals to
the businessmen, bureaucrats and politicians - those in power. This has led to
its vitiation and the entry of political interests and those of big money to
the detriment of the liberal education that people need to be become civilized
and one that would challenge the existing orthodoxy for achieving social
change. Because of its link with the power structures, it is also not
interested in affording opportunities to many in our society who are the
oppressed.
It is also important to point
out that language has been used to
obfuscate and confuse issues. For instance, in 1991, a right wing agenda in
India was pushed through on
the pretext of Reform and liberalization. When growth has been exclusive, the
talk is of inclusive growth. The entire media, dominated by the corporate
sector has been systematically used to spread the confusion and make out that
things are better than they are and on the correct path. In this, forces from
the Left and the Right are no exception. The movements and the public get
confused by this and unable to be decisive.
II.2 Material
Inequity in the world is both falling and rising.
While inequity has many dimensions, today when one talks of it one predominantly refers to the material one.
That is measured in terms of per capita income or how much resources of society
can one potentially command. After the Second World War, when the phase of
decolonization ended, there were sharp differences between the advanced
countries (largely the colonial powers) and the underdeveloped world (the
former colonies). Such differences in per capita income have declined with many
of the former under developed countries doing particularly well since the mid
Seventies. One may mention China India
However, in most of these
countries, the distribution has worsened
with a small minority gaining rapidly and leaving the rest far behind. This is
true in today’s two fastest growing and large economies, China and India USA USA
and India disparities are
greater today than say 60 years back. Thus, overall inequity is increasing even
if in some parts it appears to be not the case.
This is due to the neo-liberal
agenda being followed all over the world under the influence of the International Finance Capital which is imposing
similar policies on all economies, big and small making them follow `growth at
any cost’ with all costs falling on the poor. Today, Capital is on the
ascendancy and labour (and Trade Unions) on the decline. The control of the
financial structures by a few people in the world is a way of increasing their
share of income and this results in marginalization of the marginal and
increase in inequity. In India, today less than 0.1% of the population
controlling big business is making more income (18% of GDP) than 53% of the
population dependent on Agriculture makes (17% of GDP). More can be earned
through speculation in real estate
and the stock markets than through regular work. Simply moving capital around
the world is enough. However, it is now clear that these trends were
aggravating the risks of a growing financial
bubble and now a collapse of the system as a whole and not just of the
financial structures has set in (Kumar, 2008b). Even the largest and best
informed structure, US Fed did not realize its seriousness and extent.
II.3 Inequality leads to more
of it.
It needs to be understood
that inequality becomes the cause of
more of it unless society makes a conscious effort to reverse the trend and
eliminate the causes of its existence and accentuation. This has been discussed
in Kumar (2007). It is argued that the beneficiaries of this process believe
that they are responsible for their own progress and the rest who are suffering
in that situation because of their own actions and so they are themselves to
blame. The successful ones demand more and more concessions and policies
favouring themselves. This then perpetuates the divide and makes the chasm
grow.
This is a natural consequence
of the social belief that people are
homo-economicus – rational profit maximizing individuals. In this view,
progress is seen to depend on the actions of the elite – the business community
and the professionals. The elite classes are pursuing this in a self-serving
manner and pushing for their narrow self-interests irrespective of its impact
on distribution. Capital is taking advantage of this philosophy. Its earlier
belief in a welfare state has given way to this exclusivist and elitist model
of development. This is aggravated by market fundamentalism of `dollar vote’
and the marginalization of the marginal by the market processes.
II.4 Markets, equality and
changes in consciousness.
Here an important distinction needs to be made between
`markets’ and `marketization of society’. The former is a purely mechanical
device for the exchange of goods and services while the latter is the
penetration of the market consciousness into all institutions of society –
whether it is marriage or consumption. What was not commercialized, like,
water, sea beaches, etc., have been commercialized and markets have been
created in these areas/activities where no markets existed. The underlying idea
is `efficiency’ based on the notion of Man as homo-economicus. It relies on the
idea of the Economic Man to the exclusion of all else – social, political or
cultural, etc. It suggests that
economics determines all else in society. This has been internalized in
society and has created the modern day hegemony with people increasingly
accepting it and behaving accordingly. A consequence is that the deepest
feelings Man had of emotions, sense of community and togetherness have been
replaced by alienation and atomization and the individual reduced to being no more than a sophisticated machine (as
suggested in the 28th Congress in Gandhigram).
The
result is that anything is possible and Society
has lost its innocence and the citizen has been hollowed out with lack of
emotions – like a sophisticated machine.
Trust in society is a
casualty. Family which was based on trust and emotional attachment is now a
mere shadow of its former self. Atomized individuals can divorce at will.
Adjustment to each other is difficult because all are profit maximizing. Feeling of guilt and self-doubt is a cost
in a profit maximizing world which needs to be minimized so one is always
in a mode of self-justification so that there is little scope of adjustment to
the other. One’s own gratification is the most important. When `more is
better’, then sacrifice is stupidity.
But family, society, etc., are institutions that demand sacrifice to build them
but this value has taken a severe beating and that is why these institutions
are in a state of crisis even in the most advanced nations.
The use of sex and violence to sell products or to entertain people has
reached new heights. It is targeted to exploit the baser instincts of people.
It is used to titillate. Its psychological
impact on people needs careful analysis. Amongst children, it shows up as
confusion resulting in violent behaviour and psychological pathology. Large
number of people are forced in the advanced countries to go for counseling or
for psychiatric help. This trend is growing rapidly in the developing countries
also like in India
The growing black economy involves illegality (Kumar, 1999). Since
society works according to rules/laws, the black economy is anti-social. It has
been characterized as eating up the innards of society like termites, making it
hollow. It is currently estimated to be around 50% of GDP so is both systematic and systemic. It is
concentrated in the hands of 3% of Indians and results in huge inequity. It
results in large amount of social waste and unproductive activities. It has led
to growing criminalization and
undermining of the work culture in society. It also results in the alienation
of citizens and consequently makes social actions difficult. Thus, it aggravates
the market based tendencies noted earlier. Unfortunately, it is one of the most
neglected aspects of the Indian existence and is hardly studied or sought to be
controlled.
One may ask, can material progress be the only yardstick
of progress? Only in an atomized and alienated world where economic well-being
is the end all. Clearly, under the circumstances, other aspects of society that
take a beating lead to an impoverishment of people in those spheres. All the
costs of treating development purely in economic terms are falling on the weak,
the marginalized and the poor. While a wage maybe paid to a worker, if free
goods of nature disappear, poverty becomes harsher as is the case with the
landless in the rural areas or the slum dwellers in the urban areas (Kumar,
1997). Incomes have risen but so has
poverty. Its nature has changed and it is incomparable with what it was in an
earlier era.
Due to the short termism prevalent
in society, environmental degradation has reached new heights. Due to the
international division of labour, polluting industries are relocating in the
developing world helping reduce pollution in the advanced countries. The impact
of this on the poor in the less developed countries is that they work in
polluted environments and suffer health damage so that increased incomes are
mostly absorbed by the health related expenditures. One may recall Larry
Summers’ argument that it is more efficient for people to die in the developing
world (reported in the London Economist, February 8, 1992).
There are several kinds of
confusion in the argument for material
prosperity as the sole criterion for gauging progress of individuals and
society. It does not necessarily promote feeling of satisfaction and
contentedness amongst the individuals. In fact, in a capitalist society, it is
the opposite since lack of satisfaction and contentedness is used to promote
more consumption so as to make higher profits. Higher material consumption
leads to environmental degradation and reduction in prosperity or welfare through
greater disease. One may live longer but if it is as a vegetable, it is hardly
progress.
Finally, this economistic view of society results in
short termism and lack of a long term view of Nature or Society. However,
homo-sapiens have evolved over a billion years and since this Earth can survive
for at least another 4 billion years one needs to keep the long term in view.
However, the disjuncture between the
long run of society and existence and the short termism of individual and
society poses a grave danger to existence itself and that is the ultimate in
the downside of the current so called `progress’.
Question of globalization as
marketization needs to be understood. Its one-way characteristics need to be
analysed for what it impact it has on people’s struggles. It also impacts the
nature of alternatives that people conceptualize and the limitations it imposes
on their imagination. In this context, the definitional issues are critical.
They need to be sorted out, otherwise we talk at cross purposes.
II.5 Aspects of Science and Technology
Improvements in S & T are seen as essential to
rising prosperity of Man. It is argued that as markets enlarge with rising
consumption, they spur technological improvements. Thus a virtuous circle is propounded between prosperity and technology.
However, S & T can potentially continue to advance independent of rising
consumption – there is no essential relationship between them. Some of the
greatest scientific advances took place during periods when consumerism was
unknown and markets were entirely limited to the local. There have been periods
in which a society has made rapid advances in S & T and the same society in
different periods has lagged behind the rest. This is linked to the social
structures and creativity of the population which is spurred in certain periods
and suppressed in others.
Even if market size is
important in some sense, it should not be confused with marketization and the
accompanying consumerism. Cheapening of products due to technological
advancement may increase affordability and consumption so that the market size appears
to be linked to the technological development but the causation maybe opposite
to the one suggested by the proponents of
markets. Some technologies show increasing returns to scale. This is a
property of the technology and not of the size of the market. Finally it has
little to do with marketization.
In India, the recent
expansion of the use of cell phones or of air services and the earlier
expansion of colour TV has to do with the economies of scale and not the nature
of the economic system or the dependence on the market philosophy.
Nano-technology and bio-technology are amongst the most rapidly evolving technologies. Undoubtedly,
they have a vast potential but both have come with their own sets of problems
for society. Specially, the latter has associated with it the issue of bio
ethics. Meaning of life and nature of
future men are linked to it. Use of stem cells, cloning, bio engineered
foods, etc., are raising issues that we are not able to cope with because we do
not have the full understanding of the likely consequences. We may create new forms of life that may pose
a danger to life as it exists and, including to humankind. Potentially this could
create a further divide between the haves and the have nots because the new
technologies are likely to be quite expensive. The use of the genetic information
to type caste people may result in classifications that will have consequence
for our view of equity and equality. Possibility of creating unequal people has
opened up and this is a deeply disturbing trend (possibilities of Animal Farm
kind of divisions are opening up).
Information technology has already demonstrated the
pitfalls associated with rapid changes in technology. A deep divide between the
haves and the have-nots has opened up and there is talk of the growing digital divide. While many structures
of social functioning like banks, insurance, stock markets, are deeply
dependent on the use of information technology and computerization, many do not
even have access to electricity or to stable supply of electricity. This
increases the marginalization of the marginalized. The digital divide as it is
referred to is leading to growing disparity in access to knowledge and to the
creation of a new form of unskilled labour which is almost non employable. Thus
inequity and inequality are getting aggravated and becoming acceptable in
society.
The world has witnessed in
the last century a rapid technological change the like of which has never been
witnessed before. Internet and automation of the kind that exists today was not
conceivable even twenty years back. Thus, society is living in a mist where the
future is unclear and uncertainty has
increased many fold and this is shaping social attitudes. Short termism and
narrowing of horizons (both in space and
time) follows which makes the emergence of movements difficult if not
impossible. People become more atomized.
A bigger question is whether S&T has changed social consciousness in
a basic way? Some of the best scientists and technologists have been most
right wing and individualistic. Superiority of the white race for genetic
reasons, etc., is being propagated by some of the best scientists. Attitudes of
scientists are shaped largely by their social milieu rather than the other way
round. The narrow specializations inherent in today’s S & T is isolating
the scientists and technologists from the social and cultural milieu of society
and therefore they have a sanitized view of social processes. Consequently, they
have little understanding of issues of equity and equality. They are affecting society in untold ways but
without an understanding of what they are doing. This is a potentially
dangerous situation. This is not to argue that the social scientists or those
in fine arts have a good appreciation of the Sciences and that too is
dangerous.
Presently, technology
dominates over Man like never before and in a wide variety of ways is resulting
in their atomization. For instance, the way communication technology has
progressed, people rather than meeting each other prefer to use its
impersonalized forms. Maintaining contact with a large number of people is like
not having any depth with anyone. There is little time left for deeper
interactions or for reflection. There is overload of information but that does
not get transformed to wisdom.
Today, the impact of modern
physics and bio-sciences on society is profound. Not only our understanding of
life is altering in a fundamental way but of our very existence. We are
confronted by the idea that the nature of space-time and existence may impose
on us severe limitations in understanding our Universe or Multiverse. We are
restricted to four dimensions whereas some argue that there may be many more. Can
we ever know the truth?
The social implications of
this are deep and may affect religion
in a deep way. The problem with religion is its link with power and its consequent deviation from its original
conception. It has behaved like other institutions of society and has often
been an instrument of furthering inequality and inequity. It has served to
perpetuate the rule of those in power and keep the people from revolting. It
has created another layer of obfuscation amongst people which is hard to
overcome due to the personal faith involved. Hence while at the individual
plane it may remain relevant, at the social plane it has often played a
negative role. Modern Physics while expanding our horizons about existence is
also going to philosophically change our attitudes to life.
II.6 Growing
gap in culture. Today, culture has
become mass culture. That would have been alright but it is guided by a few
very large firms that are in turn guided by commercial interests. This is overwhelming local cultures and they
are finding it hard to survive in the competitive climate. Local theatre, music
groups, etc., are floundering in the face of advances by the film world and
entertainment by TV. The print media is also suffering as a result of the
penetration of media into homes and the conversion of large number of people
into couch potatoes. There is a tendency for the homogenization of culture and entertainment in apparently diverse
fields.
Today, the European film
world is a pale shadow of what it was till the Eighties. British, Swedish,
French, Italian and Polish film industry has been marginalized by Hollywood and
its all pervasive influence. It even dominates the thriving Bollywood which is
in any case under the grip of western influences. Use of European locales and
marginalization of Indian themes and of the concerns of the marginal sections
is very visible. Themes are related to the NRIs and the well-off sections.
Dreams are being sold so that the common man has an escape from the drudgery of
the day to day life. Of course, there are exceptions (like, Bill Gates or
Infosys people) but that is what they are.
What would sell is decided by
the interests of the large firms operating in the entertainment industry and
they leave little scope for the off-beat and others. Budgets are huge since the
technology involved is sophisticated and expensive. To recover the high costs,
large markets are needed which are created through high pressured advertising.
The film industry and mass
entertainment are linked with creating false dreams and selling them, keeping
people from facing reality and reflecting on it. They promote consumerism and
at times suggest that cleverness means fooling others – depicting extreme
alienation. This is in line with selling what can be sold by whatever means.
The industry is also promoting cult of violence in politics and life or
justifying and humanizing the mafia (Sarkar, Munna Bhai, Godfather and Don).
Today, it has become
acceptable to sell one’s name for a
price. Whatever can be commoditized should be and no negative value is seen
to be attached to it because the biggest value is money. In contrast, this was
alien to the earlier ethos. Certain things were sacrosanct; the things most
prized by self and one’s name and fame were certainly in that category. The
contrast between Don Bradman’s behaviour and that of Sachin Tendulkar is stark.
They are comparable in terms of their achievements in cricket and in terms of
their talent but Bradman never used his name to sell anything or run commercial
enterprises. Times have changed.
Even what is holy or sacred is not so any more. Like, the Ganga or Godavari being polluted. Everything can be commercially
exploited. Thus, there are no fixed points for people to follow. One violation
of the earlier code of keeping things private and non-commercialized is
followed by the next - nothing is sacrosanct.
The world of business sees an
opportunity for itself and propagates more of violation of the current laws. Initiative is associated with creatively
bending rules. No remorse or guilt
need be associated with one’s actions in earning money. A Bacchan or a Hema
Malini or an Aishwariya or a Khan selling things they would not want their
children and grand children to consume is acceptable. Social conscience is to
be minimized for maximizing one’s gains. What
happens to others or to society as a result of one’s actions is immaterial.
Money matters and not what social impact it produces.
III. NATURE
OF MOVEMENTS AND STRUGGLES
III.1 Movements
and spontaneity.
Do movements occur
spontaneously and when and how do they come up? Is there a design behind them
or are they created by people? What is the nature of movements? To understand
these issues, there is a need for political and historical study.
Clearly, there is no
automatic tendency for movements to take place in society. Otherwise change
would have been quick and social progress would have been rapid. There is no
painless way through which changes comes about. Movements are the result of
human and social interventions and perhaps emerge when society faces crisis
(see next section) or is in the process of rapid change so that the accepted
assumptions get challenged. The role of a strong leader is at times postulated
as a pre-requisite to the movements. The
process is iterative with change leading to movements which leads to further
change.
Movements lead to change in social consciousness and result
in basic changes including in its structures and institutions. For instance, the
movements for women’s rights has made gender equality acceptable and
produced changes in the structure of the family and the nature of work. Civil
rights movements have led to basic changes in legislation and the way justice
is administered. Anti apartheid movements have changed perceptions about the
status of the groups considered racially inferior and anti caste and anti
untouchability movements have led to changes in our perception about our
position in society and about the work we do.
However, today, in India,
there is political competition to capture the space generated by the movements.
Political parties tend to coopt the movements for their own narrow ends. Unfortunately,
this camouflages the real issues. Mere formalism takes hold and action is slow
so that people tend to become cynical and the movement weakens.
III.2 Crisis
in society and movements. Their inter-linkage.
It is often argued that
crisis in society calls for change to overcome the crisis. This change is what
inter links the crisis to the movements. However, no uni-linearity can be
postulated. Movements may or may not be successful in leading to the desired
change. History is replete with examples
of failures and set backs. Without direction, they may result only in growing cynicism
and increase in the crisis in the lives of the people
For instance, today, there is
widespread crisis in the lives of the ordinary people due to the civilizational
crisis facing society, yet, movements are limited and are having a marginal
impact on society. As already discussed, the environmental movement or the
women’s movement have had limited success while the crisis in society is deepening.
Perhaps this is because the vision encompassing each of the movements is
limited and not based on a holistic vision. These movements need to fight
together rather than singly to produce the required larger vision. Often, movements
are not for basic changes but fight for incremental change with limited gains.
This does not result in change in social consciousness at the fundamental
level.
For this reason, perhaps
there is need to distinguish between a
movement and agitation/struggle which fights for limited gains. For
instance, communist movement had a integrated vision of society which was
radically different from what exists. One cannot talk of agricultural or
women’s movement in the same vein. These are best referred to as struggles. In
other words, there is a possible hierarchy
in movements that we need to analytically recognize.
Practically, in the last century, we have witnessed
struggles for women’s rights, for democracy, for ecology, for civil rights,
against caste inequality and movements for national freedom, for establishing socialism
and communism. There have been religious movements and emergence of
fundamentalism.
III.3 Lessons of recent Indian
struggles and movements:
Nandigram, SEZs and movements
against displacement, like, in Narmada basin point to the many ongoing struggles.
Maoist are active in large swaths of the nation. These are fuelled by basic
injustice and a lack of responsiveness of the system – of the political process
and the failures of the judicial system and its recent turn towards a more
right wing framework. Any number of judgments reflect this swing.
There is hope from struggles of the dalits and women. They are leading to a
rise in consciousness amongst the marginalized sections of our population.
However, often this effect is being undermined by the growing corruption and
the decline of the democratic institutions. Parties leading the dalits lack a
long term agenda and have not been able to give a social lead. They do not
propagate a framework for all oppressed and the leadership has lent itself to easy
cooption by the current ruling interests of capitalism. The Bhopal
The dalits can legitimately
ask, why should they be the vanguard of struggle for equity and not take
advantage of what they can get from the system as it is. They suggest that the
others, their oppressors, should also feel the pain of marginalization since
they have suffered that for long. Hence they feel that the marginalization of
the Indian upper caste ruling elite in the world is desirable. They also feel
that if the international forces can be used to weaken the local interests that
have oppressed them, there is nothing wrong with that. It is a bit like under
the British rule when the dalit leaders wanted a separate voice because they
felt the upper castes would not give them equality. This was seen as divisive
and perhaps that is how the British used it. The vocal dalits perhaps do not
recognize that collectively they would be the worst sufferers from such
exploitation even if some of them gain. This is the lesson of the British rule
in India
The dalits have not provided
the leadership on the issue of education by asking for compulsory education for
all children and for a common school system giving excellent education or for
10% of GDP to be spent on education which is the only solution for a vast
majority of the poor, dalits, backward classes and women. They dominate the
Parliament and the legislatures but their own consciousness is that of the
upper caste legislators. Without good basic education how can their community
rise as a whole (Kumar, 2006)?
III.4 Nature
of the political process/parties in the Democratic World.
In democracies the will of
the people is supposed to be supreme and the political system is supposed to
facilitate it. However, the political parties, the instrumentality of the
democratic political process, the world over have come to be closely associated with vested interest. In the
USA , there are well defined
lobbies that are operative in Washington
This has also increasingly
been the case in independent India. Role of big money and black money has grown
in politics and made the politicians dependent on them and hence willing to do
the bidding of the vested interests (Kumar, 1999). One is witness to buying of
tickets in parties and seats in upper houses. Genuine representative leaders
are few and far in between. They live a life of luxury rather than life of
sacrifice as after independence. Today, many of them systematically thwart
democracy rather than promoting it.
In India, the vote percentage
has remained stagnant or even declined drastically in some states. If rigging
and other malpractices are netted out, the vote percentage would be even less.
Undoubtedly, people vote and have become more conscious of their power but who
do they vote for in the present circumstances. This is aggravated by the
decline of the institutions of democracy – legislatures, judiciary, etc.
Consequently, democracy has become formalistic. Parliamentary
democracy does not offer a genuine choice to the people. Two party system in
the US or UK or the multi-party system in India is not giving people real choices; the
choice is between Tweedledee and Tweedledum. Parties are like vote getting
machines in India
In India, all this is
illustrated by how the Congress emerged during the national movement and has
been shedding different splinters after independence and in an accelerating
trend since the Sixties. The Socialists and the Communists have followed a
similar pattern of splits. When one finds an SP claiming to be a socialist
party and packing its development body with industrialists of all hues or a CPI
(M) going against the people of Nandigram in a brutal fashion, one has to ask
`What is left of the Left in the formal Left?’
The trade union movement has
fractured beyond repair and weakened. Its growth is linked to the association
with the ruling parties so they follow a path of economism by delivering on
some promises. Each political party sets it up as a front for maintaining a
vote bank. When some TU group opposes the policies of the ruling party even
that is often linked to the interest of the opposition and not of the workers.
Hence the same group may have a different behaviour in different states.
JP movement raised hopes for
democratization of the body politic but the Janata experience shattered that
hope. In the late Eighties, the emergence of the National Front again gave hope
for change but that also came to naught. The creation of coalitions under United
Front, NDA and the UPA did not even arouse much hope because people have become
cynical. Parties lack accountability to the people since they are seen to be non-responsive
to the public. Their manifestos are seen to be meaningless. Prime Minister Morarji
is reported to have said that the manifesto is drafted by the party and the
government is not bound by it. Nothing could be more damaging to public
accountability of the democratic political processes. This is a recipe for
domination by the vested interests in the political process and a decline
towards anarchy.
The anti-corruption movements
initiated by JP in Bihar, the emergence of the Nav Nirman movement in Gujarat
or the VP Singh initiated movement in the late Eighties have all been wasted
and corruption has only grown. Movements were discredited and cynicism has
increased. Corruption has become a discredited issue because the party that
comes to power is found by the public to be more corrupt than the party they
replace.
Today there are many small
and local struggles but none that command a national following, so that they
have not transcended to being movements that can bring about social change.
There are many difficulties in this and these need to be understood.
III.5 Difficulty
of organizing movements and collective actions.
Society and its institutions
are characterized by a narrowing of horizons both in space and time so that
holistic perspectives are difficult to build. Individuals have become atomized and
social relations have been marketized. Consequently, the social aspects of the
individual’s existence have retreated. It is said that the market is
`objective’ while the social aspects are `subjective’ hence less important.
This has resulted in the
absence of a social understanding based on a holistic vision. The sub division
of problems and looking at them market by market adds to this narrowness of the
vision. In such a milieu, social groups find it difficult to devise an
alternative to the existing which can only be at the grand level. For instance,
the farmers or the workers are not able to propose a holistic alternative to
what exists and oppresses them.
Struggles do not mature into movements
and are unable to gain momentum which is the only source of change of social
consciousness. The vested interests are able to claim that `there is no
alternative’ (TINA) and claim legitimacy for themselves. This only aggravates
the social crisis.
The ruling classes claim that
there is no crisis and local problems and deal with them in that fashion.
However, crisis manifests itself in the long run and not immediately so one
could argue that not recognizing the crisis is not the same as its
non-existence; it cannot be wished away. The rulers themselves have been facing
growing difficulties at various levels and have not had a peaceful existence, a
sign of problems/crisis.
The lack of a global society
has also created difficulties in the path of evolving alternatives. Since
capital is global there is need for global movements to confront it and its
consequences. However, capital has also thwarted the emergence of global
movements for obvious reasons. Labour has been kept divided and labour
aristocracy has helped in this process. Similarly, on issues like opposition to
the Dunkel Draft or on environmental degradation the developing countries have
not been able to take a united stand in favour of the marginalized. However, it
was perhaps too naïve to expect this to happen given that the rulers in the
developing countries are themselves allied to the local elites and do not
necessarily represent the interest of their people.
NGOs in various parts of the
world have also often served the interest of the vested interests and of the
advanced nations. The source of funding is often the big foreign NGOs,
industry, governments and so on. Each one of them pushes their own agenda
through their funding. This is not to argue that there are no genuine NGOs but
to suggest that often they are under suspicion and a part of the growing public
cynicism. Finally, they give relief to local populations they work with but do
not necessarily politicize them to fight for their rights.
The difficulties arise
because capital is far more homogeneous than labour and it is able to define
its interests more clearly than the workers. Mobility of capital has added to its
clout and the weakening of labour the world over. Capital is able to make
various nation states and the states within the nation to fight amongst
themselves and thereby extracts concessions. Anyway the rulers belong to the
same class or are coopted into it.
IV. CONCLUSION
The paper argues that
societies as they are constituted have moved away from notions of equity and
equality. The underlying cause is economic and this is reinforced by various
other aspects of social existence – political, cultural, environmental, etc..
It is suggested in this paper that inequity leads to more of it in the present
capitalist system and the crisis faced by society in the recent past is linked
to it (Kumar, 2008a). The most immediate crisis in the financial sectors and
the wider economy is a consequence of this trend (Kumar, 2008b).
Penetration of the economic
aspects into all forms of social existence and viewing every aspect of
existence in economic terms has created severe problems. Both for society and
for creating movements to counter these tendencies. The idea of man as Homo-economicus
needs to be challenged. The present crisis of society is linked to this idea
which is a narrow one visible in say S&T or culture. Change becomes
difficult because it is inter locked into so many aspects of social existence.
Any solution to the present problems of society have to be based on a holistic
perspective and a long term vision.
People are born with the same
social potentiality but it is the societal processes that create differentiation.
Society has a civilizing aspect and even if there are natural differences,
society can overcome them because of the potentiality of social thought and
social organization. Civilized societies protect their weak since they realize
the potential of each citizen. Altruism is inherent to people but has got
suppressed due to the atomization of the individual and the promotion of the race
for personal achievement through competition and unmitigated greed. Today, the
best of the youth is being robbed of its formative years and a wider
socialization due to the race for material well-being at an early age. Its
idealism and energy is being turned into cynicism.
Today, society has lost its
innocence and the individuals the emotional depth they had. Anything that the
market wishes for is acceptable and technology has become the hand maiden for
rising exploitation and achievement of greater material well-being. The economic
structures of society that proclaim that the citizen is strong and must be
given individual freedom for their own needs undermine the strength of the
individual and weaken them through consumerism and advertising.
Alternatives need to be
formulated based on society’s own vision of its people. Movements are needed
for this so that the social vision and the philosophy changes to
non-exploitative forms so that a more humane society emerges. However, the very
forces that create the problems in the first place also undermine the struggles
and their trajectory to become movements. They also undermine the democratic
political processes which could have been the sources of social change.
Only a self-confident global society
would be able to overcome its differentiation and move to granting equality to
all even if there are natural differences between one and the other.
References:
- Alternative Economic Survey Group (Ed.) Alternative
Economic Survey, India 2005-06: Disempowering Masses. 2006. Pp. 29-44.
- Kumar, A. 1997. Fifty years of freedom from the
perspective of the poor. Vidyajyoti. Vol. 61, No. 9. pp. 617-629.
- ------------. 1999. The Black Economy in
- ------------. 2006. Make Reservations Effective
to Eliminate Them. Mainstream. June 9-15, 2006. Pp. 4 - 7.
- -------- ---. 2007. Macro Overview. Chapter in
the Alternative Economic Survey Group (Ed.) 2007. Alternative Economic
- ------------. 2008a. Faltering National and
Global Growth Prospects. Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 43,
No. 28. July 12 – 18.
- ------------. 2008b. Global Financial Crisis and
Government Intervention: Surplus Generation, Gearing Ratio, Asymmetry of
Financial Multiplier and Other Considerations. Forthcoming.
- Tresch, R.W. 1981.Public Finance: A Normative
Theory.
No comments:
Post a Comment