Party is my family, I'll donate everything to CPI(M) before my death

Few days before Kerala witnessed some interesting controversy regarding its most powerful communist leader Shri. Pinarayi Vijayan. Incidents spanning from imputation of so called cyber crime and the prompt action taken by the police authorities including presentation of culprits before media, throws up some pertinent questions regarding moral values and priorities of Kerala Police.

I felt the whole incident as a classic example of police officers trying to please their political Gods at the expense of small pawns. The so called cyber crime committed, that-is forwarding of a wrong picture as Pinarayi Vijayan’s House, is absolutely absurd and casts doubt about investigating officers’  common sense and intelligence. I wonder whether they know that in India freedom of speech and expression is guaranteed under the constitution and so is right to have a good laugh. Do they know that there exist a general defence of Triviality under the Penal Code which is a complete defence in the above case. Or is it the Kerala Police attempting to implement communist state principles where polit-bureau members cannot be ridiculed in public?  I dont understand how the forwarded email message was any more defamatory than some remarks/jokes made by VS himself about Pinarayi and some political cartoons published in newspapers owneded by Media Syndicate?

Then, apart from all the discussions and debates about the forwarded picture and scope of IT Act and offences thereunder, the police was conspicuously hiding the true image of Pinaray’s House. How big it is? I do not think the forwaded picture was not doing justice to the actual size of Pinarayi Vijayan’s Mansion. After all the alleged Lavlin plunder and dividents from PDP for giving membership in LDF, his house at any rate, cannot be a hut. If it is otherwise,  if he is as clean as his white starched shirt as claimed by CPI(M), will Pinarayi Vijayan donate all his properties to the Party like the true veteran comrade EMS did before his death? I doubt it.

Anyways, I would say that the entire episode highlights communist priorities of Kerala Police and exposes some dull-witted, pea-brained police offices. Honestly, I admire those two guys who played the prank and didn’t lose their homour even when displayed before media as ‘cyber-terriorist-engaged-in-character-assasination’ of Pinarayi Vijayan.

கண்ணா பிண்ணா வென்று மின்னஞ்சல் அனுப்பும் அன்பர்கள் கவனிக்க வேண்டும்.

Besides monitoring and interception, the amended Act also deals with the appointment of Indian Computer Emergency Response Team (ICERT), which deals with computer security and situations arising from cyber attacks. http://beta.thehindu.com/news/national/article39398.ece

The Cyber police have arrested two persons for allegedly making changes to a mail that portrayed a palatial mansion with a caption stating that it belonged to CPI(M) state secretary Pinarayi Vijayan. http://beta.thehindu.com/news/states/kerala/article53105.ece

The roads of Kolkata are witnessing a change in colours of celebration these days. The usual red gulal is slowly being replaced by the mixture of green, white and saffron. On November 10, with the announcement of by-election results, ecstatic supporters of the Congress-Trinmool Congress (TMC) alliance flooded the roads of Kolkata and their slogans praising Mamata Banerjee threaten to shatter the windows of Writers Building, the seat of West Bengal state government.

The Congress-TMC alliance swept the by-elections by wining eight out of ten assembly seats. The ruling Left Front could win only one seat of Goalpokhar – a traditional congress stronghold – where the Forward Bloc candidate defeated the Congress by a margin of over 20,000 votes. One seat was won by an independent. The Communist Party of India (Marxist) emerged as the biggest loser in these by-elections.

The CPM contested in five constituencies. It not only lost all five but also failed to retain the two seats it held previously. The red party suffered the major blow when TMC grabbed the Belgachia East–constituency of former Transport minister Late Subhas Chakraborti, which he had never lost since 1977 – from them. The TMC candidate Sujit Bose won this seat by a huge margin of 28,360, defeating CPM’s Ramala Chakraborti,  widow of the former minister.

Mamata Banerjee can now start dreaming about 2011 state assembly election results as the TMC has triumphed with a 100% victory record in these by-polls. The party fielded a total of seven candidates, with all of them emerging victorious. The party not only managed to destroy the red citadel of Belgachia East, but was also successful in gaining entry in North Bengal. Here, the TMC candidate Khageswar Ray made his way to the State assembly by defeating CPM’s Dhanapati Ray with a margin of 15,029 votes. The move to attract young voters towards the party by fielding young candidates did not work for the CPM. This time the party fielded a fresh, new and young candidate from Alipore, a traditional winning spot for the TMC. 30 year old Kaustav Chaterjee couldn’t improve things for the CPM, and his party lost by a margin of 27,555 votes.

The Left Front was the incumbent in three constituencies before the by poll and it suffered a loss of two seats, both of them belonging to to CPM. The other Left Front partners, also failed to shine. Communist Party of India (CPI) was contesting two seats, while Revolutionary Socialist Party (RSP) campaigned for one. Except for Forward Bloc’s lone seat, all were thrashed by the Congress–TMC alliance.

Despite an unprecedented appeal from the veteran Marxist leader Jyoti Basu to the Congress to vote in favour of the Left Front, the voters seem to have chosen the alliance over the Left Front.

This is an alarming situation for the state government. The CPM has quashed all rumours about an early state election, but the situation in the state seems to be slipping out of their hands.

Since 1976, West Bengal has remained a loyal supporter of India’s mainstream Left forces. The ruling Left Front government in West Bengal, which claims to be the sole representative of India’s peasant and working classes, showed its loyalty towards farmers by implementing extensive land reforms in the 80s. The initiatives taken by the State government did help them to win the confidence of farmers and their votes as well. That resulted in 35 years of uninterrupted Left Front rule in the State. But the scenario started changing from 2007, when the State government came up with the plan to set up a Chemical Hub in Nandigram and an auto factory in Singur, by acquiring farm lands.

Source:Google photos

The opposition in the state found what they wanted, and so -allegedly – did the then united Maoists. The issue of land grabbing was raised by the Trinmool Congress (TMC) chief Mamata Banerjee, who joined the anti-SEZ campaign with the call of ma, mati and manush. The Maoists saw this as an opportunity to infiltrate the zone of conflict. It was a golden chance for them to spread their message of armed struggle against the system, in an area which was blocked by local Adivasis to bar the entry of the state administration. The situation worsened when 14 people died in police firing. Eventually the government had to withdraw its decision of setting up a Chemical Hub in Nandigram. The same story was repeated in Singur, where Ratan Tata wanted to set up a Nano car factory, his dream project.

The story does not end there. In recent times West Bengal has lost a number of projects due to constant interventions from the opposition led by Mamata Banerjee. The total investment lost by the State in recent years amounts to around Rs. 41,100 crores.

Source: Google photos

Meanwhile, the Left Front government in the State was losing its claim to being the lone flag bearer of farmers’ interests. The State government claimed that people in those areas were in favour of the projects, but constant threats by the Maoists and opposition parties had forced them to resist. But this claim was shattered when the Nandigram by-election result came out in January 2009. TMC won the seat with a handsome majority defeating Communist Party of India’s (CPI) candidate by 39,551 votes.  This trend continued in the Panchayat elections. The Congress – TMC alliance defeated the Left Front in several constituencies which were supposed to be strongholds of the Left Front. The overwhelming majority of the Left Front in Panchayats all over the State was disrupted in 2008. Rural Bengal,  traditional vote bank of the Left Front, decided to vote for the opposition. That was a big blow to the ruling coalition, the first of many that the Left Front had to suffer later on.

During the run-up to Lok Sabha elections 2009, the Left Front initiated the Third Front, which projected itself as an alternative to the Congress –led United Progressive Alliance (UPA) and the Bharatiya Janta Party (BJP) –led National Democratic Alliance (NDA). The Third Front attracted a number of alliance partners from various states like Jayalalitha from Tamil Nadu and Naveen Patnaik from Orissa. Former Prime Minister H.D. Devegowda was also part of this Third Front.

The Left Front, mainly the Communist Party of India (Marxist), represented the most visible face of this Front. Despite a sizable number of allies, the success of the Third Front was largely dependent on the Left’s performance in the elections. CPI (M) was banking on West Bengal and Kerala to repeat the 2004 Lok Sabha election’s performance. And that’s where they misjudged the voters of West Bengal.

Congress-TMC alliance not only destroyed traditional Left bastions in the state but also fractured the prospects of the Third Front. The Left Front was routed in West Bengal.  TMC chief Mamata Banerjee spearheaded the anti- State government campaign, on the issues of land grabbing, farmers’ issues, and uncontrolled industrialisation. Ironically, the success of Congress-TMC alliance was based on the issues which were traditionally taken up by the Left.

The CPI (M) biggies like Mohammad Salim and Laxman Seth were defeated in the election. TMC for the first time since its formation saw such an unprecedented victory. As the Third Front experiment went in vain with the UPA capturing power yet again and that too with the help of Mamata Banerjee, the Left Front government started facing more and more difficulties.

The claims made by TMC chief suddenly became more visible than ever. The Maoists all of a sudden found West Bengal as their new target. A party like CPI (M) which was well known for its work at the grassroots found itself being deserted by the very same masses. And in the middle of all this turmoil, the Lalgarh incident shocked the country. The entire Lalgarh block was captured by Maoists and they forbade the entry of State machinery inside. The entire episode extended the State government’s misery. The increase in number of attacks by the Maoists is turning out to be a real pain in the back for the State government. The Maoists are particularly targeting CPI (M) offices and the party’s local leaders. Around 103 CPI (M) members have been killed by Maoists in last 2 months alone. And the total death toll has risen to 123.

The allegation of being deserted by the people of West Bengal is haunting the government. The Congress-TMC alliance is eyeing the 2011 State assembly elections to defeat the Left Front and to prevent them from forming the ninth successive government in the state. Each and every election between now and 2011 is a test for both the ruling party and the opposition. TMC’s slogan of ma, mati and manush is giving a tough fight to the Left’s People’s Democratic Revolution.

By-elections for 10 assembly seats will take place on November 7^. They are of enormous significance, not only for the State’s political future but also for the Left’s future in the State. The Left Front government has been criticised widely in last 2-3 years for adopting the same neo-liberal policies of which they were (and still are) stubborn opponents. The Left, and especially Chief Minister Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, has a point to prove. The industrialisation process started by Buddhadeb hasn’t received a warm welcome in the State. The question whether the Left will be able to hold its ground or will the Congress-TMC alliance succeed in breaching the red bastion once again remains unanswered today. November 7 will reveal the answers, which are sure to influence the political future of the State.

(To be continued)

There has been a spate of growing murder and violence in certain areas of Andhra Pradesh, Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Jharkhand and West Bengal by armed persons acting on behalf of the ‘CPI (Maoist)’.

The vicious violence unleashed by these death squads in various parts of the country must be condemned.

In West Bengal alone these death squads have targetted the CPI(M) and have killed more than 60 members and supporters of the Party in the past few months. Their use of the name of Mao Zedong, a widely respected figure, while carrying out the acts of carnage and killing, is reprehensible.

Such acts can also in no way be justified in the name of a war against the State. While every conscious citizen opposes acts of oppression committed by members of the exploiting classes or individuals in the State apparatus, the self-styled Maoists by their violent acts of vendetta, torture and gruesome killings, are gravely damaging the cause of the popular democratic movement. Indeed, they are in fact working against the interests of the workers and peasants.

In order to isolate the self-styled Maoists politically, it is important that the Indian State do all that is necessary to restore its presence and credibility in tribal areas whose interests it has largely been ignoring.

The Manmohan Singh government should review its neo-liberal policies that have pauperised the tribal people and help the state governments to meet their developmental challenges in these areas. Counter insurgency vigilante groups (such as Salwa Judum) have proved to be counter productive.

Harassment and killing of innocent local people should be avoided while tackling the violence, and those responsible for such acts in the name of fighting the “Maoists” should be punished. A genuine dialogue should be started with those “Maoists” who are ready to give up the path of armed struggle.

Watch this video in which CPI(M) General Secretary Prakash Karat at a public meeting explains how the self-styled Maoists are working against the interests of the workers and peasants.

http://blip.tv/file/2822670

The BJP on Sunday called a 12-hour bandh in West Bengal on November 30 to protest against rise in the prices of essential commodities.

“Prices of essential commodities are sky-rocketing and no political party except the BJP raised voice against it.

The party has given a call for a state-wide bandh on November 30,” newly-appointed state BJP president Rahul Sinha told reporters here.

He said that the BJP had embarked on a month-long agitation programme in the state against price hike from today, which would culminate into a state-wide bandh.

Mr. Sinha said that the BJP would write to all parties seeking support for the bandh except the CPI(M), which, he says, is responsible for the price rise.

//

(source : Democracy and Class Struggle 30/10/09, traduction Futur Rouge)

Calcutta, le 29 octobre : Kishanji membre du Politburo du CPI (Maoïste) a déclaré aujourd’hui que le gouvernement de Manmohan Singh devrait écrire officiellement au haut commandement Maoïste s’il était “sérieux” quand au dialogue.

“Si le gouvernement de Manmohan Singh est sérieux pour des pourparlers, il devrait l’ écrire à notre secrétaire général faisant l’offre noir sur blanc,” a dit le chef de guérilleros.

Dans Srinagar aujourd’hui, le Premier ministre a souligné sur une “approche holistique” pour s’occuper des Maoïstes. Cependant, la position du Centre a été qu’il ne peut y avoir aucun pourparlers à moins que les guérilleros ne déposent les armes.

Les opinions diffèrent au Congrès et dans les partis de gauche traditionnels sur comment s’occuper de la situation. Pendant que le premier ministre Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee et d’autres chefs du CPM supérieurs ont parlé de la même voix que le Centre, le secrétaire général de CPI A.B. Bardhan et d’autres chefs de gauche ont demandé des pourparlers “sans n’importe quelle condition préalable”.

Même si Kishanji n’a pas tenu à entamer la possibilité d’un dialogue entre les Maoïstes et les Marxistes, aujourd’hui il a demandé au gouvernement et au CPM de participer à un concours avec les rebelles pour le développement de Lalgarh.

 

“Le gouvernement nous reproche d’arrêter les activités de développement. Il a envoyé des hauts fonctionnaires pour accélérer le travail qu’il a manqué de faire pendant 32 ans. Nous voulons que le gouvernement prouve sa sincérité et aille se rendre compte des besoins élémentaires des gens dans Lalgarh, qui inclut des réserves d’eau potable et de soins médicaux,” a dit le chef de guérilleros.

 

“Laissez le gouvernement de faire 70-80 pour cent du travail et le peuple fera le reste. J’appelle aussi le CPM et le Congrès Trinamul, qui recourent à toutes les sortes de drame sur le développement, pour participer. J’appellerai les média le 20 novembre pour montrer ce que les deux côtés ont accompli,” a dit Kishanji.

 

Il a ajouté sur la même lancée qu’il ne déclarait ni “de cessez-le-feu”, ni ne demandait le retrait de forces comme une condition pour renouveler les projets de développement. “Tout ce que je dis est que le gouvernement ne devrait pas arrêter des membres du Comité du Peuple Contre les Atrocités de La police et d’autres qui rejoignent nos projets de développement. Permettez au gouvernement d’envoyer aux docteurs, les infirmiers et d’autre personnel. Le peuple les aidera.”

 

Le lancement du développement de Kishanji est venu un jour ses camarades ont tué au moins cinq personnes. Le but apparent : pour renforcer sa base de soutient parmi les tribaux avant une répression. L’effort de recevoir une douzaine de femmes du village libérées en échange d’un agent de police la semaine dernière a fait partie du même objectif.
Cependant, même une section des maoïstes serait peu satisfaite du massacre « aveugle » de Kishanji et de la « dépendance à l’égard les pelotons armés minant les mouvements de masse ».

Le chef de guérilleros a dit : “il n’y a aucune muraille de Chine entre l’anéantissement des ennemis de classe et les mouvements de masse. C’est la ligne de notre parti, non le mienne. Quoi que nous ayons fait a été justifié. Nous avons tué ceux qui ont trahi le peuple.”

Il a réclamé qu’il a été considéré comme “soft” dans son organisation. “Nous avons puni seulement 50 pour cent d’entre ceux qui devraient avoir été punis. Je suis contre les meurtres inutiles »

'Naveen Cow and Calf' i.e Congress

Foreword: ‘Cow and Calf’ had been Congress party’s symbol before the open Palm symbol. This blog thinks that more than ever it in the current situation that the above pic – as new symbol -  is truly and most accurately representative of Congress. Last time it was Indira and Sanjay, now it is Balidaan Moorti Ma and Crowned Prince.  

Lok Sabha polls 2009, Then three important states Maharashtra, Haryana and Arunachal Pradesh delivers verdict in favor of  the Holy Cow and Calf led family firm called ‘Congress’. Kudos!

Now I am not going to dissect the election results for two reasons. One: it is for the political parties especially the opposition to ponder TWO: elections are over and it is the moment of truth and truth is: opposition failed miserably.

Well, in a democratic setup –how so ever flawed it may be- ‘Statistics’ matters and ‘statistics’ are clearly in favor of ‘Cow and Calf’. Period.

No arguments, no discussions, no debates, no grudges. ‘Calf and Cow’ are here and they are here to stay it is the ultimate truth.  It is the emergence of ‘Naveen Cow and Calf’ Congress party.  Bear it or F*** off.

“Naveen” in Hindi means ‘New’ so I call it ‘Naveen’ Congress.

BTW, this Naveen too has been pretty lucky for the ‘Cow and Calf’  ever since he was appointed CEC despite strong protest by almost entire opposition parties … Am I suggesting some thing? Uummmmmmhhhh…what you think?

If at all we had any hope of seeing any alternative formation challenging the ‘Cow and Calf’ led ‘Syndicate’ (including Media, NGOs, CBI, and Intellectual Masturbate-rs  of several hues) in the form of BJP! Then we were grossly wrong.

BJP these days has only one opposition to fight against and that is: BJP alone; no body else. They are busy among themselves and if – and BIG ‘IF’- at all they sort their issues they might think of some real issues concerning people too, yes they might, just. So far with leader like Party President Rajnath at the helm of affairs- it seems impossible.

May be it is time for like minded bloggers to revise their support for BJP and find a political party which endorses the ‘Right and Righteous Path of Governance’ and challenge the ‘syndicate’ of ‘Cow and Calf’ admirers. Till then, we (vigilant bloggers though the Media Queen Ms. Barkha Dutt Hates us so much) should take command in our own hands and keep a strict vigil on the ‘syndicate’ and keep exposing them for what they are: pack of  mere time servers, sycophants,  swindlers, looters.

NOW, more than the victory of ‘Cow and Calf’ – which is only ‘Statistical win’- it is the sorry state of BJP in particular and any ‘ideological opposition’ in general which the real cause of worry is.

Ominous signs for what future we, as a Nation are heading for!

The President: Normally some one who inspires.

But we are not living in normal times Sigh! Here is ‘You’re President’.

Prime Minister: Most important man in whose hand is the destiny of Nation in normal times got to have a standing of his/her own and will/command/mandate and character to lead the Nation through.

But all the above is for ‘Normal’ times yeah! We have ‘Dr. Economist Mr. Clean’ Prime Minister Minion! All other qualities or qualifications apart he is PM for only because he is the least threatening to the Holy ‘Cow and her Calf’.

Council of Ministers: Collective responsibility and collective wisdom was what the constitution framers had in mind for ‘Normal’ system of Governance.

Above is expected, but for ‘Normal’ time, which sure we are not living in. “Collective Loot”, “Individual Sycophancy to ‘Holy Cow and Calf’” and “Self Promotion” is the buzz now.

Effective and strong “Opposition” to keep a check on the Ruling party and its policies is as important as Governance in any democracy, but then that too is for ‘Normal’ times. Isn’t it?

But then, on this front too all we see is: petty local ‘regional chieftains’ whose vision does not go beyond their nose and whose only purpose is to demand their share of loot. Only two ‘Ideological’ formations like BJP and Communists who ‘claim’ to have an ‘alternate’ system of governance are in disarray and there are no visible signs of their timely and effective recovery, they might go further down the pit they find selves in. Certainly not these are ‘normal’ times!

Unless we now choose to redefine: what ‘normal times’ are.

In a vibrant and health democracy MEDIA is expected to be a watch dog, again only in ‘Normal times’ it is expected that MSM uncovers truth, dig out scams, educate people and bring issues to fore. Normal times Huh!

With MSM now part of ‘Conspiracy’ and fully in service of ‘Holy Cow and Calf’ only because – according to ‘Media Sultan Rajdeep’ Journalist Mange More – they have to keep running their ‘Shops’ euphemistically called “Media Houses”, they are now days indistinguishable from the charlatans of ‘Cow and Calf’ brigade.

Judiciary is the last refuge of a ‘wronged’ person to solicit justice. Normally and rightly it is expected from the courts to deliver justice- on time and in full. But in, ‘Normal Times’, You See!

Now I am not commenting on respected Judiciary any which way. I am ‘mortally’ scared of Judiciary which at times has shown to be ever on very short fuse- but a Certain ‘Verbal Terrorist’ does get away with lambasting the SC after NBA verdict. I am too humble a Blogger to invite Judiciary’s “attention” any which way. But then CJI’s reluctance here did not inspire confidence in many at least, isn’t it?

Now let us see where ‘We the People’ of “Sovereign, Socialist, Secular, Democratic Republic of India” – a thousands of years old Civilization with ONE BILLION people – stand. Normally it is our collective duty to elect true representative of ours and held him/her accountable and change when he/she does not perform. Normal Expectation of Course!

But then, voting day is a day to relax with kids and friends. If voting day extends your weekend then WOW! Decide which country side or near by vacation spot family choose to go to, then take out your car and drive off. If at all you choose to go to vote: then consider who is from your cast, or choose because he/she sent you cheap liquor ‘quarter’, or did he deliver 500/= Rs. Note on time, or choose because of any other sundry consideration BUT CERTAINLY NOT for his/her commitment towards people, certainly not for his/her achievements, certainly not for his/her programmes, certainly not for what his/her vision is.

Do we still have a right to crib? Do we still have any reason to complain?

Certainly Not. We deserve the Government we elect.

High time Voting is made Constitutionally Compulsory Duty of Every Citizen.

Now for sure I am convinced that we are living in Ram Rajyaa.

How, you ask? Well let me explain: with all the above what you have read i.e.: No body is doing the job he/she supposed to do, yet we are, do you not wonder we still are One Nation and alive!!!!

Every thing is Ram Bhrose. Only God knows how a Billion strong Nation still exists, otherwise successive governments (Mostly ‘Cow and Calf’ syndicate for the longest period ever since Independence) left no stone unturned to wipe it off from the Globe – at least as one strong coherent political Nation.

God Bless My Country. God Bless Bharat! Amen!

PI

PS: BTW, this blog has crossed 100,000 hits thanks to you all readers/friends. Though, this blog has achieved, a very small milestone,  yet time for me to celebrate. Cheers!

Thanks to you all once more.

PI.

 Sitaram Yechury

2009 marks the 60th anniversary of the triumph of the Chinese revolution. The establishment of the people’s Republic of China ranks as the third most important development that shaped the trajectory of human civilisation in the 20th century. The Great October socialist revolution of 1917, the defeat of fascism in the Second World War in 1945 and the consequent decolonisation of the world and the Chinese revolution have had an inedible impact on the course of human civilisation.

During the course of the last three decades China has made tremendous strides in development that are incomparable with that of any other country in contemporary history. The average annual double digit growth rate during these thirty years has converted socialist China into an economic power house in the world. When China embarked on its reform process in 1978 many had quipped that socialist China requires capitalism to develop. Today in the wake of probably the worst capitalist global recession, the general feeling is that world capitalism requires China to bail it out of this crisis.

How was such a remarkable development possible? Particularly in a period when the mighty socialist Soviet Union was dismantled two decades ago. When all pen pushers of imperialism and the bourgeoisie were busy seeking to nail the coffin of socialism claiming that capitalism is eternal, socialist China continued to build upon its economic successes. Right wing intellectuals pursuing their theories of `end of ideology’ hastily attribute China’s successes as having nothing to do with Marxism or socialism. Some amongst the Left are equally concerned if China’s success constitutes the restoration of capitalism. Some ask: Has Mao’s China been jettisoned? Have the `capitalist roaders’ taken over China? What is the future of socialism in China?

 On this 60th anniversary of the Chinese revolution some of these questions need to be examined and evaluated.

The triumph of the socialist revolution in Russia (and subsequently, following the defeat of fascism in the second world war, in the relatively less developed Eastern Europe; semi-feudal semi-colonial China; northern Korea; Vietnam and Cuba) did not and could never have meant the automatic transformation of these backward economies and low levels of productive forces into high levels (higher than that of capitalism) of socialised means of production.

For the purpose of our discussion, however, it needs to be noted that every socialist revolution, based on a concrete analysis of concrete conditions, worked out its approach towards developing rapidly the productive forces. How this can be done is specific to the concrete realities, both domestically and internationally, faced by the specific revolutions.

Lenin, himself, noted on the 4th anniversary of the October Revolution: “Borne along on the crest of the wave of enthusiasm, rousing first the political enthusiasm and then the military enthusiasm of the people, we expected to accomplish economic tasks just as great as the political and military tasks we had accomplished by relying directly on this enthusiasm. We expected — or perhaps it would be truer to say that we presumed without having given it adequate consideration — to be able to organise the state production and the state distribution of products on communist lines in a small-peasant country directly as ordered by the proletarian state. Experience has proved that we were wrong. It appears that a number of transitional stages were necessary — state capitalism and socialism — in order to prepare — to prepare by many years of effort — for the transition to Communism. Not directly relying on enthusiasm, but aided by the enthusiasm engendered by the great revolution, and on the basis of personal interest, personal incentive and business principles, we must first set to work in this small-peasant country to build solid gangways to socialism by way of state capitalism. Otherwise we shall never get to Communism, we shall never bring scores of millions of people to Communism. That is what experience, the objective course of the development of the revolution, has taught us.” (Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 33, pp.58 emphasis added)

Further, he proceeds to state: “Capitalism is a bane compared with socialism. Capitalism is a boon compared with medievalism, small production, and the evils of bureaucracy which spring from the dispersal of the small producers. In as much as we are as yet unable to pass directly from small production to socialism, some capitalism is inevitable as the elemental product of small production and exchange; so that we must utilise capitalism (particularly by directing it into the channels of state capitalism) as the intermediary link between small production and socialism, as a means, a path, and a method of increasing the productive forces.” (Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 32, pp. 350)

But, does this mean the restoration of capitalism? To this Lenin answers quite candidly during the period of the NEP (new economic policy) that: “It means that, to a certain extent, we are re-creating capitalism. We are doing this quite openly. It is state capitalism. But state capitalism in a society where power belongs to capital, and state capitalism in a proletarian state, are two different concepts. In a capitalist state, state capitalism means that it is recognised by the state and controlled by it for the benefit of the bourgeoisie, and to the detriment of the proletariat. In the proletarian state, the same thing is done for the benefit of the working class, for the purpose of withstanding the as yet strong bourgeoisie, and of fighting it. It goes without saying that we must grant concessions to the foreign bourgeoisie, to foreign capital. Without the slightest denationalisation, we shall lease mines, forests and oilfields to foreign capitalists, and receive in exchange manufactured goods, machinery etc., and thus restore our own industry.” (Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 32, pp. 491)

 To a certain extent, what we find in the post-reform socialist China is, a reflection of the theoretical positions Lenin had taken regarding state capitalism during the NEP period. The main question involved is that of increasing the productive forces in a backward economy to a level that can sustain large-scale socialist construction. Lenin, during his time, on the basis of the concrete international and domestic situation, consistently endeavoured to rapidly bridge the gap between backward productive forces and advanced socialist production relations. The course of this Soviet history of socialist construction, however, took place under different historical circumstances. Encirclement of the Soviet Union, the civil war, the preparations for the second world war by the fascist forces did not allow the Soviet Union a peaceful period necessary for a protracted period of transition towards the consolidation of socialist productive forces. The pace of the socialisation of the means of production had to be hastened for the very survival of the socialism itself. The fact that it did succeed in socialising the means of production through `collectivisation’, bore the brunt of fascist assaults during the second world war and decisively defeated them will go down as one of the most remarkable and liberating experiences of the 20th century.

In China today, what is being sought is to attain the conformity between the levels of productive forces and the relations of production under socialism. The advanced socialist production relations cannot be sustainable at lower levels of productive forces. A prolonged period of low levels of productive forces would give rise to a major contradiction between the daily expanding material and cultural needs of the people under socialism and backward productive forces. The Chinese Communist Party (CPC) has concluded that if this contradiction remains unresolved, then socialism itself in China would be under threat.

Following the political turmoil that took place during the cultural revolution and after the dethroning of the `Gang of Four’ a serious introspection was begun by the CPC on political and economic issues. In 1978, clearing confusion and incorrect understanding on many political issues and practices, the CPC adopted a comprehensive ideological line that culminated in what they call `one central task and two basic points’. `One central task’ is economic development, the `two basic points’ are adherence to the four cardinal principles (Marxism-Leninism and Mao Zedong; socialist road; people’s democratic dictatorship; and leadership of the Communist Party) and the implementation of reforms and open door policy.

Soon after the initiation of the reform process, in a conversation with Kim Il Sung in 1982, Deng Xiaoping says: “In a country as big and as poor as ours, if we don’t try to increase production, how can we survive? How is socialism superior, when our people have so many difficulties in their lives? The Gang of Four clamoured for `poor socialism’ and `poor communism’, declaring that communism was mainly a spiritual thing. That is sheer nonsense! We say that socialism is the first stage of communism. When a backward country is trying to build socialism, it is natural that during the long initial period its productive forces will not be up to the level of those in developed capitalist countries and that it will not be able to eliminate poverty completely. Accordingly, in building socialism we must do all we can to develop the productive forces and gradually eliminate poverty, constantly raising the people’s living standards. Otherwise, how will socialism be able to triumph over capitalism? In the second stage, or the advanced stage of communism, when the economy is highly developed and there is overwhelming material abundance, we shall be able to apply the principle of from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs. If we don’t do everything possible to increase production, how can we expand the economy? How can we demonstrate the superiority of socialism and communism? We have been making revolution for several decades and have been building socialism for more than three. Nevertheless, by 1978 the average monthly salary for our workers was still only 45 yuan, and most of our rural areas were still mired in poverty. Can this be called the superiority of socialism? That is why I insisted that the focus of our work should be rapidly shifted to economic development. A decision to this effect was made at the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee, (1978) and it represented an important turning point. Our practice since then has shown that this line is correct, as the whole country has taken on an entirely new look.” (Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping, Vol. 3, pp. 21-22)

It is essentially such an understanding that led to a theoretical conceptualisation of the primary stage of socialism. This in fact conforms to what Marx and Engels themselves had stated and what is accepted by all subsequent Marxists: that socialism is the transitory stage between capitalism and communism and hence constitutes the first stage of a communist society. The CPC however has gone a step further to formulate that within this transitory stage, there will be stages depending on the levels of productive forces at the time of the revolution. This was systematically elucidated in the 13th Congress of the CPC. Basically, what it meant was that China, being a backward semi-feudal, semi-colonial country at the time of the revolution, was at a stage where the socialist transformation of its economy will have to be conducted from very low levels. The World Bank, in 1980 sent an investigation team to China which estimated that the per capita GNP in 1952 was US $ 50, even lower than that in India and only slightly more than one-fifth of that in the Soviet Union in 1928. In a country with the largest population in the world, the effort for a transformation into a modern socialist economy is, indeed, a stupendous task. The CPC estimated that this process would take atleast a hundred years from the time of the revolution to reach the stage of a modern socialist economy. It is this process which they call (is called) `the building of socialism with Chinese characteristics’.

In order to achieve such a transformation, the CPC put forward another theoretical formulation that of building a socialist market economy. By now, it is clear that as long as commodity production exists, there would be a need for a market to exchange these commodities. It would be erroneous to conclude that under socialism the market will cease to exist. So long as commodities are produced, the market exists. The crucial question is not planning versus market but which dominates. Under socialism, market is one of the means for the distribution of the social product. Centralised planning, utilising the market forces and the market indicators, will be able to efficiently develop the productive forces and meet the welfare demands of the people. Therefore, ignoring market indicators leads to greater irrational use of resources which will adversely affect the plan process itself.

What is sought to be created in China is a commodity market economy under the control of the socialist state where public ownership of the means of production will remain the mainstay; by which the CPC means “firstly that public capital predominates in total social capital; secondly, the state economy controls the economic lifeline and plays a dominant role in the national economy”. Through this, they seek to prevent the economic polarisation and growing inequalities created by private market economy and ensure the common prosperity of the working people.

As a result of these reforms, China over these decades has achieved tremendous successes. Material standards of living have grown by leaps and bounds. Poverty levels have come down sharply. In health, higher education, scientific research and technology development, China has moved ahead at a commendable rate. It has come a long way from 1978, when the gross domestic product, at current prices, stood at 364.5 billion yuan. By 2007, it had grown 68-fold to 25.1 trillion yuan. In 1978, the average annual disposable income of urban households was 343.4 yuan, while in 2007, it was 13,786 yuan, a 40-fold increase. For rural households, the increase was 31-fold to 4,140 yuan from 133.6 yuan. The country’s poor population was reduced from 250 million in 1978 to 14.79 million in 2007.

In the year 2008, GDP had increased by 9 per cent over the previous year, grain output continued its increase for the past five years, per capita annual net income of rural residents increased by 8 per cent while the per capita annual disposable income of the urban residents increased by 8.4 per cent. China had topped the gold medal tally, displacing the US, in one of the most spectacularly and successfully organised Beijing Olympic games in 2008. China is also host to the largest number of internet users in the world with more than 300 million users among whom 270 million connect through broadband. The scientific achievements of China are displayed best by the space walk carried out by the Chinese astronauts abroad the Shenzhou 7 spacecraft joining the country in a band of select few. The speed with which the country had reacted to one of the most devastating earthquakes in Wenchuan and conducted comprehensive relief and rehabilitation activities also testify not only to the enormous strides of progress made by the country but also speaks volumes of its social commitment. All these have been possible not because China `broke from the Maoist past’ but because it developed on the solid foundations laid by the People’s Republic of China during the first three decades of centralised planning.

However, new problems are also cropping up as a result of these developments. They are mainly the growing inequalities, unemployment and corruption. The CPC, cognizant of these dangers, is taking measures to tackle these problems. But the fact remains that with the current transformation of the State owned enterprises, there is a net accretion to the unemployed every year. While the State maintains a minimum subsistence allowance and offers re-training programmes for retrenched workers, unemployment is a serious problem.

The main question that emerges is whether these growing inequalities will take the form of the formation of an incipient capitalist class? Lenin, while talking of State capitalism and emphasising the need to rapidly expand the productive forces, also warned of the risks to the socialist State that such a period of transition will bring about. Characterising the process of building state capitalism as a war, Lenin says: “the issue in the present war is — who will win, who will first take advantage of the situation: the capitalist, whom we are allowing to come in by the door, and even by several doors (and by many doors we are not aware of, and which open without us, and in spite of us) or proletarian State power?” (Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 33, pp 65) He proceeds further to state: “We must face this issue squarely — who will come out on top? Either the capitalists succeed in organising first — in which case they will drive out the Communists and that will be the end of it. Or the proletarian state power, with the support of the peasantry, will prove capable of keeping a proper rein on those gentlemen, the capitalists, so as to direct capitalism along state channels and to create a capitalism that will be subordinate to the state and serve the state.” (Lenin, Collected Works, Vol. 33, pp 66)

Similarly, Deng Xiaoping in a talk during his visit to southern China says: “The crux of the matter is whether the road is capitalist or socialist. The chief criterion for making that judgement should be whether it helps promote the growth of the productive forces in a socialist society, helps increase the overall strength of the socialist state and helps raise living standards.” (Social Sciences in China, Vol. XX, No. 2, pp. 29)

Further, in 1985, addressing some of the apprehensions of growing inequalities Deng Xiaoping says: “As to the requirement that there must be no polarisation (read growing economic inequalities), we have given much thought to this question in the course of formulating and implementing our policies. If there is polarisation, the reform will have been a failure. Is it possible that a new bourgeoisie will emerge? A handful of bourgeois elements may appear, but they will not form a class.

 ”In short, our reform requires that we keep public ownership predominant and guard against polarisation. In the last four years we have been proceeding along these lines. That is, we have been keeping to socialism.” (Selected Works of Deng Xiaoping, Vol. 3, pp. 142-143)

Clearly, the CPC is in the midst of a serious effort of building socialism with Chinese characteristics. The CPC is endeavouring to rapidly expand the productive forces and, thus, consolidate and strengthen socialism in China through these reforms. On the other hand, as noted above, this very process engenders certain tendencies which seek to weaken or even destroy socialism. As a result, ideas and values alien to socialism will also surface. Imperialist finance capital is there in China not to strengthen socialism but to earn profits and to create conditions of adversity to socialism. They would certainly seek the weakening of socialism or its dismantling in order to earn greater profits. This is the current struggle between imperialism and socialism that is taking place in the theatre of China. And, in this struggle, on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the Chinese revolution, the efforts to strengthen and consolidate socialism will receive solidarity from us and the Communists the world over.

Sitaram Yechury is Member of Polit Bureau and Head of the International Department,Communist Party of India (Marxist)

 From India News Network (INN), New Delhi, September 28, 2009

Hundred of crores stashed in Swiss tax havens. How much of it is true and what can we do to get our money back.

Five Reasons Why It’s Not Going To Be Easy

• India needs to have tax/fund information sharing as part of bilateral agreements with tax havens.
• Also needs supporting agreements to repatriate funds or suspected felons. This could of course take decades.
• Tax havens also need to relax their banking secrecy rules.
• India would have to first furnish names of suspected fraudsters and establish illegality of bank account holder’s fund source.
• Fraud component in each individual case will need to be proved, which is a lengthy process. Just “fishing” won’t work.

***

Swiss Bank FAQs

• Can open an account if above 18, minimum balance varies from 5,00,000 to 1 million Swiss francs.
• Apart from UBS and Credit Suisse, the two largest banks, there are 330 other Swiss banks to chose from.
• An account can be opened via correspondence, but not via the Internet. Customer verification systems are followed.
• Wire transfers and cash deposits are accepted. Sources and origin of funds have to be explained.
• Can open a numbered account, but that only means fewer people know the account-holder’s identity.
• Yes, it’s true. Swiss banks offer a very low rate of interest if one chooses to keep funds parked there.
• Indians can now legally open an overseas bank account, as long as one declares it to the tax authorities.

***

Swiss Secrets

Estimates of Indian money in Swiss tax havens

BJP & CPI(M): $500-1,450 billion (Rs 25-75 lakh cr)
Source: KVM Pai (former chief IT Commissioner, Mumbai), Wikipedia, “Swiss Banking Association”.
Pai’s Sources: Swiss Bank Corporation (2006), intelligence sources, global reports.

OECD: $11-12 trillion (Rs 548-598 lakh cr)
Overall estimated funds in 77 tax havens. No country break-up.

Tax Justice Network: $22.7 billion (Rs 1 lakh cr)
Illicit capital flows during 2002-06 from India.

Black money expert Arun Kumar: $50-100 billion (Rs 2.5-5 lakh cr)
Illegal money that could be flowing out of India every year. No authentic figures available.

***

“One option is to allow repatriation of funds in instalments. Another is taxation, in stages or on a lower rate.” —S. Gurumurthy, Swadeshi Jagaran Manch

“Every VDS disclosure has been completely abused… unfortunately the government has failed to declare them.” —K.V.M. Pai, Ex I-T commissioner
“It’s not just the Swiss banks, what about the Mauritius route? Here, nothing happens…they are just scoring points.” —D.

Raja, CPI leader
“Most investigations come to a dead end… one money-laundering case can go through many jurisdictions.” —Jyoti Trehan, ADGP, Punjab Police
“The issue of Swiss banking is so poorly understood, we are utterly mixed up on tax havens, treaties etc.” —Mukesh Butani, BMR & Advisors
“There are no authentic figures available. I am doubtful about the premise of $1.4 trillion in Swiss banks.” —Arun Kumar, Tax Justice Network

***

It’s the mother of all skeletons in the cupboard, or is it just a clever marriage of popular myth and political expediency? Brought up in a huge parallel or black economy, many Indians unsurprisingly believe that illegal tax havens are repositories of huge amounts of ill-gotten gain by politicians and businessmen. Why, elections have been won—in 1989 for one—on the issue of corruption and the link with Swiss banks. Who can forget India’s half-hearted attempts to track and get back the payoff money in the Bofors case?

Now, all of a sudden the whole get-back-the-billions-of-dollars debate is gathering political momentum again.

Major political parties in the Opposition—from the BJP to CPI(M) to JD(U)—have promised to leave no stone unturned to get back the illicit Indian funds from overseas and use it for the country’s “development”. The trigger, of course, has been the recent US success in getting Swiss banking major UBS to bend their secrecy rules, disclose names of around 300 customers and pay a penalty of $780 million for aiding tax evasion.

In an election bereft of major issues, the reactions have predictably ranged from approval to scepticism. But in this surcharged atmosphere, it’s also a political hot potato. Opposition leader and the BJP’s man for the top post, L.K. Advani, has been stressing on the issue in his speeches. Another BJP star campaigner, Narendra Modi, has even started opinion polls across Gujarat. In all this, the UPA hasn’t been silent either: Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has questioned the basis of the BJP’s numbers, while party technocrat Jairam Ramesh has written a letter to Advani accusing him of “lying” to the nation.

Meanwhile, there have also been accusations of government inaction on accepting the German authorities’ offer to share names of 1,400 people, including many Indians, holding hidden accounts in LGT Bank in Liechtenstein, a tax haven in western Europe. While UPA leader and home minister P. Chidambaram denied the charge, no government official looking into these matters agreed to speak to Outlook, citing the election code of conduct.

The war of words was natural in this politicised environment. Much of the debate has focused on the amount of illicit Indian funds overseas. Hardly surprising as the numbers vary from a mind-numbing Rs 25 lakh crore to Rs 75 lakh crore. Whatever the amount, there are also other fundamental issues: firstly, will the government be able to identify the account holders in Swiss banks and other tax havens? Will it be able to establish how much of the funds are legal and illegal? Can these funds then be brought back, and will the government have rights over it? Given that all this will take time, are these just election promises that are more rooted in realpolitik than reality?

Some international perspective is necessary here. “The era of banking secrecy is over,” the G-20 leaders announced grandly in a communique earlier this month. The leaders even agreed “to take action against non-cooperative jurisdictions, including tax havens”. Just how that translates into, say, an Indian government exposing accounts and recovering the money is less clear. As Nishith Desai of tax firm Nishith Desai Associates underlines, “One country cannot request another country to reveal confidential communications between a client and an attorney. This exchange of information is still a work in progress.”

The only global muscle against tax havens is the Financial Action Task Force of the OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development), a grouping of 30 wealthy nations. The FATF figures that tax havens hold some $11-12 trillion. It has published ‘black lists’ of jurisdictions that don’t comply with international standards for exchange of tax information. But this is a call for cooperation only in the course of investigation into a particular case of reasonable suspicion. There will be, as an FATF official says, “no fishing expeditions, no automatic exchange of information”. The FATF has produced 40 recommendations and another nine special ones, but they are just that—recommendations.

While global leaders threaten to blacklist tax havens unwilling to share tax fraud and money-laundering information, our own leaders are pledging various steps, including bringing in yet another voluntary disclosure scheme (VDS). An amnesty is at the heart of the BJP’s strategy to get back the illicit money, according to S. Gurumurthy of the Swadeshi Jagaran Manch, part of the four-member panel appointed by Advani to suggest a gameplan. “The other option is to allow repatriation of funds in instalments. The third is taxation. This can be done in stages, or on a lower rate, or there can be an exemption below a certain level of declaration.”

Given the dozen-odd VDS attempts we have had, with little follow-up action, former I-T chief commissioner K.V.M. Pai isn’t very hopeful. Credited with having fired the first salvo through a letter earlier this year to the PM, Pai estimates that black money accumulated by Indians—whether circulating within the country or parked overseas in tax havens—could easily “surpass income tax collections of the last 61 years”.

Based on inputs from friends and intelligence sources, this ex-revenue services officer pegs the amount at about $1.4 trillion in Swiss banks alone. Together with funds in other tax havens, the number scales a mind-boggling $5 trillion. These very figures are doing the rounds on the Net and in political manifestos too. “Every disclosure (in VDS) has been completely abused. Unfortunately the government has failed to declare those abuses,” avers Pai.

As many as 20.7 lakh votes were cast in a referendum held in Ahmedabad on whether black money held in Swiss banks should be brought back. 20.4 lakh voted in favour.

Barring the recent OECD estimates of funds in tax havens, experts concur that there is nothing to establish the amount hoarded by Indians in global tax havens. “There are no authentic figures available. I am doubtful about the premise of $1.4 trillion in Swiss banks. Though the OECD has put a figure of over $11 trillion in tax havens, how much of that is Indian funds is not known,” says Arun Kumar, JNU economics professor and member of the Tax Justice Network, an organisation that tracks activities in 77 tax havens.

In short, there is no way of knowing how the black money of the country finds its way offshore, or how much. Some estimates put it as 10-20 per cent of India’s GDP as against 6 per cent of the $16 trillion GDP in the case of the US. Given the ambiguity, there’s been considerable scepticism about the veracity and sources of the estimates of illegal money parked overseas. However, some argue that the entire focus on the amount of illegal money overseas is facetious. Another member of the BJP’s task force, Professor R. Vaidyanathan of IIM Bangalore, emphasises: “If we don’t try to prise open the wheels of secrecy of Swiss banking, when the list is eventually released by some other country, we’ll be the laughing stock of the world.”

Similarly, D. Raja of the CPI stresses the need to keep black money on the agenda for the new government. “It’s not just the Swiss banks—what about the Mauritius route? Nothing has happened except that one party will score points over the other,” he says. This brings us back to the original question: for all this talk about breaking Swiss banking secrecy, will India be able to get this information—and be able to act on it? The answers are not so simple.

To begin with, India will have to establish that funds held by overseas banks are ill-gotten. Given liberalised rules permitting up to $2,00,000 repatriation a year by individuals, there is now a fair amount of room for Indians to park funds overseas. Though India is not looked at as a major source of terror, arms or drug money, individuals and companies use other innovative ways to park funds overseas to avoid paying taxes.

Globally, under-invoicing of imports and over-invoicing of exports are among the modus operandi employed by businesses to accumulate illegal funds. Another method employed by companies is to acquire a shell company in a tax haven at an absurdly low price, and then re-sell at the market price, to create tax-free profit. The provision on shell companies is now being toughened following the G-20 meeting, and that could be an inroad into accessing individuals who often use these companies to hold their money and disguise their transactions.

The challenge for any government in India, or anywhere else, would then be to establish the fraud before the jurisdiction in a tax haven. Given its own national interests, the host jurisdiction will have much reason to challenge it, and even tip off their client to disguise the money further. As Mukesh Butani of BMR & Advisors puts it, “In India, the issue of Swiss banking is so poorly understood that the UBS disclosure, G-20 communique, unregulated tax havens and tax-related treaties are utterly mixed up.”

Experts stress that in the case of UBS, the US was able to put pressure on the bank because of its large presence in the country. Also, the tax fraud was established beyond doubt. Yet, even in the UBS case, there are over 16,500 accounts still shrouded in secrecy. Is it possible that India would fare better? Can it craft watertight legal cases to present tax havens with a fait accompli?

More often than not, the fault lies within. Going by his own tenure at Interpol, Punjab’s additional director general of police, Jyoti Trehan, says that “most investigations come to a dead end or get stalled. One money-laundering case may have gone through many transactions involving several legal jurisdictions. Going through each process may take several years”. Having rarely seen the extradition of a fraud accused come through, Trehan is not too hopeful of India meeting much success in getting back illicit money parked overseas. He cites the failed attempt to trace former Tamil Nadu chief minister Jayalalitha’s reported secret accounts in London through an old boy network in Singapore.

Experts stress that for the legal process to have teeth, it has to be backed strongly by bilateral diplomatic relations and international treaties. As India has found to its cost, bilateral treaties like that with Mauritius can in fact become a legal route to rerouting black money into the country. Moreover, the all-important question remains: do our political leaders have the will to pursue the black money issue to its logical end? As late prime ministers Narasimha Rao and V.P. Singh would have pointed out, there can be a heavy price to pay. Not everyone is willing to put his or her head on the block. The answer will be evident after Elections ’09.

Outlook, india

I was in Bengal, my home state, recently and sampled the rapidly changing political landscape. The state infamous for being never-changing had suddenly begun looking different.

Politics in Bengal, like anywhere else, is in layers. The leaders play their own games and are in the public domain. The CPM biggies speak from Alimuddin Street and principal challenger Mamata Banerjee holds forth from her new brick-and-mortar headquarters painted green next to the smelly garbage dump of Tiljala. They set the tenor for the political discourse.

But it’s the neighbourhood clubs and dadas that spread the message around and have a grip on locals. Many years ago, Tapan Sinha’s film Atanka had illustrated how these networks function. The acclaimed director had left us with a haunting, killer punch line: “Mashtarmoshai aapni kintu kichui dekhenni” (Teacher, remember you have seen nothing at all).

The film was about a principled teacher who chances upon a political murder and musters up enough courage to report it to the police. The men from the local club make life unbearable for him, disfiguring his daughter with acid, threatening him not to spill the beans.

This is not to say that whatever happens in these hole-in-the-wall clubs is evil. But politics is about control and there have been numerous instances of coercive local dadas crossing the line.

Today, with change in the air, Trinamool clubs are making forays into localities that had one club holding unquestioning sway over residents.

In my north Calcutta neighbourhood, there is this man who we have known as the party. I haven’t ever seen the local CPM councilor, the MLA or MP. And whenever we needed to interface with the government, he was the point person telling us how to go about it and who to approach.

In his heyday, the poorest of the poor went to him for hospital beds. If they had a run-in with the cops, he would accompany them to the police station and get the matter settled. Landlords and tenants arguing over rent, a domestic help who had been wronged — his durbar was open to all. Name a dispute and this man intervened.

Strangely, he never had any trappings or looked no different from the run-of-the mill guy who takes a rush-hour metro ride to his place of work. I have no clue if he has netherworld links. But his eyes were cold and you wouldn’t fancy rubbing him the wrong way.

You just sang along and readily subscribed to Ganashakti when he came along and tossed a copy at you — small price to pay for peaceful existence.

With the sands of politics shifting, a challenger has emerged. This man, also a local, has converted an abandoned structure into his club. He has strung up a Trinamool tricolour, acquired a framed photograph of a smiling Mamata and is rapidly digging himself in, playing his party’s official do-gooder. These days, his durbar is swelling with people.

Years ago, when I voted in Calcutta, the CPM dada was a constant presence in the polling booth. He smiled at you. A glint in his eyes, he nodded and humbly asked: “Aamra pachchi to?” (We are getting your vote, aren’t we?).

He had the local demographics on his fingertips – how many members which family had, who lived in the US or had recently moved to Bangalore. So, even as voting was on he had a fair assessment of which way the wind was blowing. In those days, opposition polling agents swatted flies and dared not say a word. I am not so sure it’s going to be the same in 2011.

But whoever wins the next mandate, I sincerely hope the days of “aapni kichui dekhnni” (you have seen nothing) are behind us. After all, the clubs and the dadas are a manifestation of a government that has never honed its delivery systems, of poor governance and an administration that isn’t close to people.

The culture of favours has permeated too deep. Reason a patient struggles for a bed in a government hospital. But if he has the big man from the club with him, he is in luck. The police treat you shabbily and shoo you away, but when the party chap stands up for you, they listen.

In return, the dada network demands unquestioning loyalty saying “koriye dilam” (got it done for you). Over the years the system has gotten rusty. You think fifty times before demanding cure and care from a government health facility though it’s your right. You pay for it and need no dada to recommend care for you.

I am an optimist. The next government must make an effort to get things going. Citizens must not be forced to accept a new set of dadas and clubs lording over a new patronage-loyalty network.

By Sitaram Yechury

IT has been a year since the legendary financial giant Lehman Brothers collapsed on September 15, 2008. This global giant had weathered the railroad bankruptcies that rocked the USA in the 19th century and also the Great Depression of the 1930s. On this occasion, it became the first victim as well as the trigger that shot down financial markets globally, causing probably the worst recession in capitalism’s history.

The World Bank has explicitly stated that 2009 would be the first year on record since the World War II to register an absolute fall in world output. It has revised its earlier estimate of a minus 1.7 to a minus 3 per cent fall in global GDP. During these twelve months except, for China (7.5 per cent) and India (5.5 per cent), all other major economies have seen a decline in their GDP.

Despite having injected over 2.3 trillion dollars into the US financial system, its GDP fell by a minus 2.6 per cent. Similarly, all the G8 countries have registered negative growth rates, Germany minus 6.2, France minus 3.0, Italy minus 5.1, Japan minus 6.0, UK minus 4.2, Canada minus 2.3, Russia minus 6.5. Among the emerging economies, Brazil registered a minus 1.3 per cent, Mexico minus 7.3 and ASEAN countries minus 0.3 per cent.

According to the World Bank, nearly 100 million people will be trapped in absolute poverty in 2009 and 2.8 million more babies may die by 2015. The ILO has declared that more than 50 million are going to join the existing ranks of the unemployed this year. The real estimate is bound to be higher as the ILO relies on the data supplied by respective governments, many of whom are not counting the vast number of migrant labour losing their jobs and returning home. In USA alone the official unemployment rate has climbed close to 10 per cent while unofficial estimates record 16 per cent. In absolute numbers the unemployed have crossed the seven million mark in the USA.

Such is the gloom that according to a Washington Post-ABC news poll released on September 15 2009, President Obama’s approval rating on the handling of the economy dropped from 62 per cent in February to 45 per cent now. It is becoming increasingly clear that all the bailout packages have mainly helped the financial corporates to beautify their balance sheets and not stimulate the real economy for generating jobs for the people. As we have repeatedly stated in these columns earlier, these bailout packages always put profits before people rather than putting people before profits. This is evidenced by the fact that Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan Chase, the two financial giants that collapsed on the Wall Street have now emerged from the ruins, feasting on the monies they have received through such bailout packages. On the back of billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money, JP Morgan Chase has announced a record 2.7 billion dollars profit in the second quarter of 2009.

On the occasion of this anniversary of 9/15, many books have been published seeking to unravel the manner in which this crisis unfolded. One of these makes an analysis of the cyclical capitalist business cycle in the entire history of capitalism. It shows that in the aftermath of an average crisis asset prices fall sharply, real housing prices fall on an average by 36 per cent over six years, equity prices by 56 per cent over three and a half years.

Unemployment tends to rise by seven percentage points during the down phase of the cycle, which on average lasts four years. Government debt increases by 86 per cent. GDP falls by over 9 per cent on the average, and typically takes ten years to return to what it was before the crisis. This is the history of an ‘average’ crisis. What we are witnessing is much worse than an average crisis. Under these circumstances, it would be naive to exude confidence of a visible turn-around in the global economy. Such optimism being exuded by the prime minister and the Planning Commission could well be a case of gross overestimation of the Indian economy.

During this year India’s growth plummeted from over 8 per cent to 5.5 per cent. During the first quarter of 2009 industrial growth was 0.3 per cent compared to 6 per cent in the last quarter of 2008. India’s exports fell from a 10.4 per cent growth in September 2008 to minus 33.2 per cent in the first quarter of 2009. Over 30 lakh jobs are estimated to be lost in the organised sector alone by the end of 2009. Nearly 12 lakh jobs have already been lost in the export oriented sectors. In the unorganised sector the job loss is bound to be much higher. In addition are those lakhs of people returning from abroad having lost their jobs there particularly in the Gulf.

Like elsewhere in the world, in India too the stimulus packages announced by the government have helped the corporates to emerge from the crisis but have not helped to stimulate the real economy into generating a larger number of jobs. We have in the past analysed that the relative resilience shown by the Indian economy in the wake of the global recession has been due to two specific factors: the prevention of greater financial liberalisation by the Left under the UPA-I government and the injection of huge liquidity into the economy due to the sixth pay commission and the fifteenth general elections. The latter is a one off expenditure which cannot sustain expanding domestic demand in the future to maintain higher levels of production. This can happen only if a quantum leap is made in the levels of public investment which would lead both to the building of the much needed economic and social infrastructure in the country as well as generate new employment.

Instead, as we have seen, the budget papers for this year inform us that as much as Rs 4.18 lakh crore were foregone as tax collection last year as a result of various tax concessions. While continuing these concessions the government has now abolished surcharge on corporate tax and increased the exemption limit for income tax giving an additional bonanza of Rs 10,000 crore. Thus Rs 4.28 lakh crore are the amount that is being foregone by the government’s own admission. This is being done under the presumption that with greater availability of capital, the corporate world would expand its activities and thus stimulate the economy.

 There is a fundamental flaw in this reasoning. No amount of availability of capital can stimulate the economy unless there are people who have the purchasing power to consume what is produced. Instead, if this amount of money was put into direct public investment for building our infrastructure, the consequent job creation would have vastly increased the purchasing power of the people and thereby stimulated the economy.

However, like everywhere else, as is the internal logic of capitalism, the governments have stepped in to shore up the corporates through various bailout and stimulus packages rather than bailing out the people through increased public investment.

This is clearly reflected in the performance of the top Indian firms (BSE 200) during this year since the collapse of Lehman Brothers. In the last quarter of 2008 the income of these firms rose by 12.8 per cent while their net profits declined by minus 17.6 per cent. In the first quarter of 2009, while their income grew by a minuscule 0.2 per cent, their net profits jumped by 28.6 per cent. In the second quarter of 2008, their income declined by minus 7 per cent, yet the net profits rose by 20.7 per cent. Clearly, while the economic activity is contracting, leading to unemployment and misery for the people, they continue to reap super profits thanks to ‘bailout packages. Such is the logic of capitalism that puts profits before the people.

It is thus imperative that popular struggles must be strengthened to force our government to adopt policies that put people before profits by vastly expanding public investments.

Editorial of ‘Peoples’ Democracy’

Massive Demonstration in front of Delhi Govt. Secretariat by Delhi CPI(M) on 17 September 2009

Sitaram Yechury, M.P. and Polit Bureau Member, CPI(M) and Vijender Sharma, Secretariat Member, Delhi State Committee, CPI(M) addressing the demonstrators at Bahadurshah Zafar Marg, New Delhi.

Sitaram Yechury, M.P. and Polit Bureau Member, CPI(M) addressing the demonstrators

Demonstrators at Bahadurshah Zafar Marg which was blocked for more than half an hour

A Mammoth Rally of Determination at Kolkata on August 31, 2009

CPI(M) Dharna in Front of Parliament in New Delhi on June 18, 2009

Brinda Karat, M.P. and Polit Bureau Member, CPI(M) addressing

Tapan Sen, M.P. and Central Committee Member, CPI(M) addressing

P.M.S. Grewal, Secretary, Delhi State Committee and Central Committee Member, CPI(M) addressing

Baldev Singh, Secretariat Member, Delhi State Committee, CPI(M) addressing

Anurag Saxena, Member, Delhi State Committee, CPI(M) addressing

Albeena Shakil, Member, Delhi State Committee, CPI(M) addressing

Prakash Karat, General Secretary, CPI(M) and Sitaram Yechury, Polit Bureau Member, CPI(M) carrying the body of Harkishan Singh Surjeet. August 2008.

At the time of 18th Congress of Communist Party of India (Marxist) held at New Delhi in April 2005