If you are having any problem to reading this blog?Convert your screen resolution to 1078x768 ,please. To read text in Bengali please read this pdf document and follow the instructions. Let's popularize Bengali and all the Indian Languages on Net.
Assam Mazuri Sramik Union is Swabhiman's fraternal organisation & closest ally in grass-root activity for people's rights.It is Registered under trade union act 1926. registration no -2287.
৪ এপ্রিল ২০২১ ভোরবেলা হৃদরোগেআক্রান্ত হয়ে চলে গেলেন পিসিসি
সিপিআই (এম-এল)-এর কেন্দ্রীয় কমিটির সদস্যকমরেড অনির্বাণ বিশ্বাস। নকশালবাড়ির বিপ্লবী ধারার রাজনীতিতে তিনি ছিলেনউন্নত তত্ত্বের প্রবক্তা এবং
সুলেখক। নকশালবাড়ি আন্দোলনের শুরু থেকেইবিপ্লবী চর্চা ও অনুশীলনের সাথে সরাসরি যুক্ত ছিলেন।
প্রেসিডেন্সি কলেজে পড়ার সময়, ১৯৬৮সাল থেকেই পার্টির কাজকর্মের সাথে যুক্ত হন কমরেড অনির্বাণ। ১৯৭১ সালেগ্রেপ্তার হয়ে বছরখানেক জেলবন্দি
ছিলেন। ছাড়া পাওয়ার পর আবারওনকশালবাড়ি ধারার বিপ্লবী কাজকর্ম চালিয়ে যান। পরবর্তীতে কলকাতাবিশ্ববিদ্যালয় থেকে অর্থনীতিতে
স্নাতকোত্তর ডিগ্রি প্রাপ্ত হন। ১৯৭৫ সালেরজরুরি অবস্থার সময়ে আবারও গ্রেপ্তার করা হয় তাঁকে। ১৯৭৭ সালে জেল থেকেছাড়া পাওয়ার পর কিছুদিন পার্টির
সর্বক্ষণের কর্মী হিসেবে কাজ করেন।এছাড়াও বন্দিমুক্তি আন্দোলনের সাথেও ওতপ্রোতভাবে জড়িত ছিলেন। পারিবারিকপ্রয়োজনে ১৯৮১ সালে হেতমপুরের
কৃষ্ণচন্দ্র কলেজে অর্থনীতির অধ্যাপক হিসেবেযোগ দেন এবং সমান্তরালভাবে পার্টির কাজকর্মের সাথেও
যুক্ত থাকেন।
তাঁর রাজনৈতিক সহকর্মীরা বলেন, তিনিপ্রখর স্মৃতিশক্তির অধিকারী ছিলেন, অনেকেই তাঁকে ‘নলেজ
ব্যাঙ্ক’ বলেওডাকতেন। বোলপুরের পুরোনো সাথী
কমরেড মৃত্যুঞ্জয় ঘোষ তাঁর সম্পর্কে বলেন— ‘আমার দেখা সেরা সৎ সর্বহারা মতাদর্শের প্রতি
নিষ্ঠাবান মানুষ। জ্ঞানের স্পর্শে মনে হত চলমান বিশ্বকোষ।শিশুর মতো সরল। প্রাত্যহিক দিনযাপন ছিল চরম অযত্নের।
অনির্বাণদা যখন কথা বলতো, সে চলমান
সমাজ বাস্তবতা হোক, কবিতা, খেলা (ক্রিকেট বা ফুটবল), দর্শন, অর্থনীতি সবেতেই চূড়ান্ত পাণ্ডিত্যের ঝলক। সেই কমরেড অনির্বাণ বিশ্বাস এরঅভাব ভোলার নয়।’
একাধিক পত্রিকার সম্পাদনা করেছেন
তিনি।সমর সেন
সম্পাদক থাকাকালীন ১৯৬৮ সাল থেকেই তিনি ‘ফ্রন্টিয়ার উইকলি’ পত্রিকার
সাথে যুক্ত হন ও পরবর্তীতে লেখালেখি শুরু করেন। ১৯৮৭-তে সমর সেনমারা যাওয়ার পর ফ্রন্টিয়ারের
সম্পাদকের দায়িত্ব নেন তিমির বসু। তিমিরবাবুর সাথে ২০১২ সাল থেকে সহকারী সম্পাদক হিসেবে কাজ করেছেন কমরেডঅনির্বাণ। ১৯৮০ সাল থেকে
ধারাবাহিকভাবে পিসিসি সিপিআই(এম-এল)-এর ইংরেজিমুখপত্র ‘ফর অ্যা নিউ ডেমোক্রেসি’-র সম্পাদনার
কাজের সাথে যুক্ত ছিলেন ।ষাটের দশকের ছাত্র আন্দোলনের কর্মী কমরেড নির্মল ব্রহ্মচারী জেল থেকেমুক্তি পাওয়ার পর নরওয়েতে চলে
যান। তিনি কলকাতা, লন্ডন, ওসলো ও ঢাকারলেখকদের নিয়ে একটি সামাজিক ও সাংস্কৃতিক পত্রিকা বের করে চলেছেন – নাম ‘পূর্বাশা এখন’। দ্বিভাষিক
পত্রিকাটির ইংরেজি বিভাগের সম্পাদক ছিলেন কমরেডঅনির্বাণ। পত্রিকাটির সর্বশেষ সংখ্যায় কমরেড
অনির্বাণ বিশ্বাস সাম্প্রতিকবিধানসভা নির্বাচন প্রসঙ্গে পিসিসি সিপিআই (এম-এল) -এর পশ্চিমবঙ্গ রাজ্যকমিটির বিবৃতি সুস্পষ্টভাবে তুলে
ধরেন।
২০০৬ সালে প্রকাশিত তাঁর বই ‘The
Cowrie Currency and Monetary History of India’ প্রকাশিত হয় ‘ক্যাম্প’ প্রকাশনাসংস্থা থেকে। তাঁর অন্যতম চর্চিত বই ‘Money and Markets from
Pre-colonial to Colonial India’ প্রকাশিত
হয় ২০০৭ সালে দিল্লির ‘আকার বুক্স’ থেকে।
জন্ম ১৯৫২ সালের ২০ জুলাই
চট্টগ্রামেরশাকপুরায়।
বাবা প্রয়াত হৃদয় রঞ্জন বিশ্বাস ছিলেন বীরভূমের হেতমপুরেরকৃষ্ণচন্দ্র কলেজের অর্থনীতির অধ্যাপক ও মা প্রয়াতা
নমিতা বিশ্বাস। পাঁচভাই ও একবোনের
মধ্যে তিনি চার নম্বর। বড়ভাই প্রয়াত সুদেব বিশ্বাস ছিলেনশিবপুর ইঞ্জিনিয়ারিং কলেজের স্নাতক এবং সিপিআই
(এম-এল) পার্টির শুরুরসময়ের এক
নিষ্ঠাবান কর্মী। কমরেড অনির্বাণের স্ত্রী ঝর্ণা বিশ্বাসবর্তমানে হেতমপুরের বাসিন্দা, মেয়ে মৌসুমি বিশ্বাস বিশ্বভারতীতেপদার্থবিদ্যায় গবেষণারত। জামাতা
অমিতাভ সৎপথী পেশায় স্কুলশিক্ষক।
সহজ সরল জীবন ধারায় বিশ্বাসী
কমরেডঅনির্বাণ
ছিলেন বিপ্লবী রাজনীতির এক বিশ্বস্ত যোদ্ধা। মৃত্যুর আগে পর্যন্তওতিনি তাঁর বিভিন্ন লেখায় ভারতে
সংঘ-বিজেপির ফ্যাসিবাদের বিরুদ্ধেঐক্যবদ্ধ হওয়ার কথা বলে গেছেন ও সক্রিয়ভাবে তা প্রচার করে গেছেন। বাংলাতথা ভারতের বামপন্থী সমাজবিজ্ঞানী, অর্থনীতিবিদ ও বিপ্লবী রাজনীতিতেবিশ্বাসীদের খুব কাছের সহযোদ্ধা
ছিলেন তিনি। তাঁর মৃত্যুতে শোক ব্যক্তকরেছেন বহু রাজনৈতিক ব্যক্তিত্ব। সিপিআই (এম-এল) নিউ ডেমোক্রেসি, সিপিআই (এম-এল) রেড স্টার, সিপিআই
(এম-এল) কানু সান্যাল গ্রুপ –এর মতো
বিপ্লবীবামপন্থী দল
এবং বন্দিমুক্তি কমিটি সহ বিভিন্ন সামাজিক-সাংস্কৃতিক সংস্থা ওট্রেড ইউনিয়নের তরফ থেকেও শোক
প্রকাশ ও বিদায়ী অভিবাদন জানানো হয়েছে। ‘নয়া গণতন্ত্র’ ব্লগে
নিয়মিত লিখবেন বলে জানিয়েছিলেন তিনি এবং কিছু লেখাপ্রকাশিতও হয়েছিল ইদানিংকালে।
বিপ্লবী আন্দোলনকে ত্বরান্বিত করা
ও একউচ্চতর
পর্যায়ে নিয়ে যাওয়াই হবে তাঁকে শ্রদ্ধা জানানোর উৎকৃষ্ট পন্থা।কমরেড অনির্বাণ বিশ্বাস সমাজ-বদলের
হাজারো সংগ্রামীদের স্মৃতিতে ওরাজনীতিতে চিরকাল অমর হয়ে থাকবেন।
ইনকিলাবজিন্দাবাদ। কমরেড অনির্বাণ বিশ্বাস লাল সেলাম।
The question of the Unity of Communists and the United Front needs to be dealt with within the framework of the subject–object,structure–superstructure relationship. The manifesto for revolution needs to be evolved based on a theoretical premise for communist unity and the united front. Dwelling on this theoretical premise, it opens a broad understanding of the urgent need of building the subjective force incommensurate with the objective reality. This rests on a general perception of the Marxist philosophy of praxis. But it has also its own specificities. In the Indian context, the left legacy has its bearing on the complexities of left unity in the here and now.
The Indian Communist Party, when first formed in Tashkent in the year 1920, carried with it the legacy of the idea of 'socialism from above' of the Second International. Though Lenin always considered Rosa Luxemburg with high esteem as a left revolutionary, Lenin criticised Luxemburg in the Seventh Congress of Second International for her underestimation of the role of the party. Though Leninist strategy was presumed to be correct in the history of the communist revolution, Rosa's contention became clear in 1906 when she wrote an outstandingly original booklet, 'The Mass Strike, the Political Party, and the Trade Unions'. She brought the Marxist idea of "the emancipation of the working class is conquered by the working class themselves" into the centrestage by advocating 'socialism from below'. It underlines the importance of 'social movement' as specific achievements by self-organising social forces.
The social movement is one of the key collective forms in which the class struggle is conducted. But the self-organising social movement has diverse tendencies in consonance with the class interest of contending classes which have their organic linkages with the social movement in specific space-time and strive to give a direction of the movement to serve their own class interest and as such all social movements are not revolutionary in character. Here comes the question of 'social movement from above' where the conscious vanguards belonging to the communist party can consciously evaluate the objective condition under which the self-organising social movement can be revolutionary and formulate the ways and means to connect with the movement from below to act as catalysts for a radical transformation of the movement. Though Gramsci's diagnosis that no movement can be purely spontaneous is true, the conscious leaderships which he termed as organic intellectuals are mostly influenced by the tradition of the specific space-time and remotely influenced by the capitalist world system in General. But the self-organising social movement releases the classes from the clutches of the tradition to make a distance with the tradition for enabling them to identify themselves as part and parcel of the class in general to challenge the entire system for a revolutionary change. This psychological uplift-ment can transform into a material force of the class-unity only through the process of the unity of myriads form of revolutionary social movements against diverse manifestations of the exploitative system.
The vanguard character of the communist party only becomes meaningful in the sense of becoming a subjective force for both the revolutionary seizure of power and radical social change when this unity becomes the prime mover of praxis. Where the lever is to be applied for the revolutionary seizure of power is decided by the development of such unity from within the movement itself and by the emancipation of the working class conquered by themselves. If this becomes the understanding of the development of the social revolution, the solid and temporally fixated conception of arrogating all knowledge of revolutionary change as scientific knowledge by the communist party and the vanguards and the idea of the infallibility of the Central committee melt into the air. Here, Rosa Luxemburg was again correct when she asserted that the process of learning of the masses from the defeat of their struggle is more precious than the victory of the vanguards. This idea of the dialogical development of the revolutionary moment can remove the barrier of the egoistic mindset and authoritarian outlook of the Party as the supreme authority of the revolution and pave the way for the unity of the revolutionaries.
The influence of the Comintern on Indian Communists had further accentuated the process of developing a sectarian outlook. Sobhanlal Dutta Gupta in his book 'Comintern and the destiny of Communism in India 1919-1943: Dialectic of Real and Possible History (Kolkata: Seriban, 2006)' writes that in the aftermath of the Sixth Congress in 1928, the Indian communists were expressly directed by the Comintern to disband the Workers and Peasants Parties (a number of such parties were acting as the vehicle of the communist movement at that time) and to leave the nationalist mass organisations. But when the Comintern shifted to a united/popular front strategy in 1935 in the face of the fascist threat, it did not admit that the line of the Sixth Congress was a mistake. A similar thing happened when consideration of the Second World War as an imperialist war at the initial phase was abruptly changed to people's war for Germany's attack on Soviet Russia. Indian Communists under the leadership of CPI was just formulating the tactics under the strategic direction of the Comintern. When the centre of the Indian communists shifted to India especially after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the same conceptualisation of Marxism as scientific knowledge arrogated and internalised by the vanguards of the party centre prevailed. The fundamental tenet of Marxism as a 'philosophy of praxis' and a process was thus undermined. This legacy is continued and has its bearing on Indian practicing communists. This is a big impediment in evolving the unity of the communist revolutionaries because each party claims that it has perfected the theory and set it for the communist revolution in India.
Caste, Class and Communist Unity This understanding has also misrepresented the conception of class. The class is considered solely as a static structural question. The conception of class without class struggle is a misnomer because, in the real world, there are classes as 'being' which is only in the process of 'becoming' through struggle. There are diverse categories of individuals or groups of individuals sans class struggle, even if they are workers in the capitalist system. This static mindset of conceptualisation of the class obscured the caste question in India from the Indian communists to ignore it from the beginning -- whenever they considered it under the compelling reality of caste struggle, they treated it as a mere tactical question. The worker–capital, the lower caste–upper caste etc. are interpenetrating in the super-structure to sustain the structure of the division of labour. Both the category of worker and caste become class in the process of struggle for the revolutionary change of the system of interpenetrating capitalism and casteism under the hegemony of capital. The static formulaic version of the class is also another stumbling block in achieving the unity of the communist revolutionaries as the real struggle in the here and now remains out of sight and focus. If the revolution and the conception of 'the working class emancipation conquered by themselves' become the prime concern, the unity of the communist revolutionaries can easily be achieved despite some differences in the theoretical polemics of strategic question which can be debated and evolved within the garb of the vibrant struggle of the classes.
The unity of different revolutionary communists and parties does not mean a monolithic formation without any inherent struggle within it. If this is conceived as the basis of unity where all differences are resolved, then this unity will transform into a dead mass without any vibrant energy necessary for living contact with the people's or class struggle. But the question remains what will be the mechanism to encourage debate to resolve differences? The mechanical formulations of constitutional norms and code of conduct for resolving the differences cannot be ruled out, otherwise, the possibility of the emergence of a debating club instead of practicing a revolutionary party cannot be avoided. But this must be subject to the continuous scrutiny of objective necessity and cannot be considered as a fundamental premise. The transitional moment determined by the intensity of class conflict necessitates the division of strategic position on the class-line for completion of a task historically bestowed on the shoulder of the revolutionary party. In this moment of societal transition too, the unified party may allow praxis based on diverse strategic positions and this is possible if the Indian communists shed their legacy of not conceding mistakes in front of the struggling masses who can learn even from the mistakes of the vanguard communists revolutionaries.
The third but most important impediment in achieving the unity of the communist revolutionaries is the nature of uneven development which is ingrained in capitalism and it is much pronounced in a country like India which is an ex-colonial country of British imperialist. The diverse revolutionary formations are engaged in revolutionary praxis in diverse parts of India, some parts are more developed than the others, and as such the class struggle in which revolutionary parties are engaged experiences diverse forms of struggle. This creates a variety of understanding of the reality internalised from the praxis. As the party centre is organically linked with its rank and file, the understanding of the party centre also gets influenced by the experiences of the praxis which is continuously summed up and the primary political task is thus continuously evolved. This is a structural barrier against the unity of the revolutionary parties. But this barrier is getting somehow mitigated by the overwhelming pressure from the combined development of capitalism and the forces of homogenisation from above for the fascist takeover of centralised power. That the proletarian ideology of the communist revolutionaries settles the question once and for all is over-simplistic.
United Front The question of the united front can be viewed from the Gramscian notion of 'War of Position' and 'War of Maneuver'. From Gramsci's study, this author is not sure whether Gramsci considered these two categories segregated for capitalist West and backward Eastern countries. But considering capitalism as a system which carries all previous pre-capitalist systems within its hegemonic control and inherently imperialistic from its birth and when, at this juncture, capitalism reached to its zenith of global expansion, both 'War of Position' and 'War of Maneuver' are intrinsically imperative for the communist parties to undertake for the development of the revolutionary social movement of diverse categories for the emancipation of the working class. But the practising revolutionaries based on their wisdom of assessment of the concrete situation must be capable of determining the moment of time when one prevails over the other and dominates the direction of the movement. The rise of fascists forces and the danger of fascist takeover of power underline such moment of history when "War of Position" i.e. the building of the united front even with a section of ruling class bourgeois parties becomes the determining factor for the development of the class struggle for revolutionary systemic change. It does not mean that the "War of Maneuver" is completely abandoned, it just becomes contingent on the united front struggle. Again, by Gramsci's account, fascism is a passive revolution and it means, the rise of fascism manifests the objective revolutionary situation for active revolution under the leadership of the working class. The weakening of fascist forces through the United Front struggle will open the space for the revolutionary forces to occupy and transform the "War of Maneuver" as a dominant form for the revolutionary seizure of power. There are revolutionary forces who consider the fascist danger in India as real but denies the necessity of a united front. Such perception is evolved from the sectarian view of considering the party as the dominant player for revolution, not the working class and their emancipation. They do not realise that the fascist forces gather strength in the absence of the emancipation of the working class and that sets the agenda for the revolutionary parties as the facilitators to create space for the working class to emancipate themselves through the united front movement.
What will be the nature of this united front? The Foundation of the united front must be the unity of the social movements. It is not the unity brought about only by social engineering or by co-ordination amongst the leaders. It is to be developed through the movements of the parts going ahead with a realization to change the whole, the systemic whole. The unity is not improvised, but the organisers are animated by the unity with total devotion to the construction of a new society as a whole far ahead of the need and interest of the parts. In this phase of capitalism, the zeitgeist is defined by the diverse social movements that have surfaced in the world stage, be it 'Black Life Matters' of America or the "Gilets Jaunes" movement of France or the "Citizenship" movement in India or for that matter, the "Save Climate or Save Nature" movement, "Anti-eviction or Rehabilitation" movement, 'Women's liberty movement' etc. All these movements have revolutionary potential to unite for the emancipation of the working class to radically change the system. The independent peasant and labour movements are also raising its face once again. The unity of revolutionary forces will accelerate the process of unity of those struggles.
But the anti-fascist united front must also include the bourgeois forces and parties who are willing to fight the fascist forces to safeguard the constitutional democracy and to gain electoral space for power. This is important because revolution does not only mean seizure of power but also means social revolution which necessitates the fulfilling of the task of extending democracy by eradicating the deficits in a constitutional democracy. As such, safeguarding the constitutional democracy becomes the primary task when the danger of fascist takeover of power becomes a reality. This also means accentuating the struggle for radical democracy and building of socialism within the garb of anti-fascist united front struggle and this task cannot be postponed as a post-revolutionary task. So, the anti-fascist movement has the primacy of safeguarding constitutional democracy through a broad-based united front movement. There will be on-going criticism of the parliamentary parties, but it won't be opprobrium from above so long as these forces maintain some distance from the fascist and uphold people's issues, the harsh criticism will be at play within class struggle and class conflict, in the vibrant life of which the working class can understand from their life experience where their class and people's interest lie.
All movements, be it revolutionary or anti-fascist, do not become a real movement so long as these do not become the festival of the oppressed. The united front gives the oppressed masses a sense of empowerment to defeat the fascist forces. This sense of empowerment is the only way for the psychological build-up of the working class to transcend their desire for higher plank for their own revolutionary emancipation. The class-struggle within which the revisionism and parliamentary cretinism need to be combated must have the agenda of restructuring the power and society until the moment comes when the revolutionary seizure of power becomes an inevitable task. What this agenda should minimally include?
The united front movement will open the space to consolidate the revolutionary forces to build overwhelming mass support-bases in various pockets. It is true that without a revolutionary Government at the centre, there will not be enough available resources for the building of a new economy in various areas. A revolutionary Government in power can only stop the diversion of resources from unproductive expenditure and primarily from huge defence spending by dismantling the standing army and arming the people for national security and striking a peace deal with neighbouring countries even if it is tantamount to sacrificing some disputed land claimed only for pandering national pride. The world history tells us that any imperialistic aggression can be successfully combated by the people's militia resurrected with a zeal to safeguard the nation for building a new society and a new country that belongs to them when mighty defence forces of the bourgeois ruling class states even fail to safeguard. The people's power can also be activated to safeguard the public property and public services with their pride to suffer but not to compromise with their sense of freedom in the event of any imperialist sanction and conspiratorial counter-revolution. But even when the united front struggle gathers sufficient strength to compel the bourgeois fascist forces in power to take a backseat, some new economy-building measures can be undertaken by the revolutionary forces within the garb of vibrant people's struggle.
A village or cluster of villages or urban areas can be mobilised for cooperative economic activities. The great reversal of China to capitalism was started by returning to family responsibility in agricultural production and party bureaucratic ownership in industrial production that dismantled the commune and collective ownership of means of production. There was a big leap in socialism-building as well as growth during the initial phase of post-revolutionary China. Pre-revolutionary China was most backward and as such building of socialism was not possible to germinate prior to the revolutionary seizure of power. But the social balance of forces is different in present-day India which is much more advanced than the then pre-revolutionary China. It is mechanistic to shelve the idea of even taking any baby-step for the building of socialism until the bourgeois class is not dislodged from power.
Charles Bettelheim writes "In the initial phase of post-revolutionary China, the commune coincides with the basic administrative unit, viz, the canton or the townships. For the time being, the administration of the commune is run by the popular council of the township. The communes can federate and constitute a single federation in each district or council. It is also within the framework of the commune that people who can carry arms are armed and organized into popular militias." Initially the mode of distribution was according to a "wage system", then moved to the passage to distribution "according to need". (Source: China's Economic Growth: Charles Bettelheim, Monthly Review, Volume 10, Number 11, March 1959). What can be done in India within the united front struggle in a pre-revolutionary period?
At the least, 'Peasants' Association' in agricultural production and 'workers' council' in the industrial work and service-place can be formed for upgrading the democratic decision-making process, and land reform and cooperative ownership of means of production can be promoted in the areas where revolutionary forces are formidable in strength and workers-peasants' class gathers sufficient power and the supreme form of electoral democracy with right to recall can be practiced. This process is, of course, sustainable if the people's movement is raised to a higher plank where working-class emancipation is on the verge of being conquered by themselves. The anti-fascist United Front struggle must also be pressurised from below to undertake the agenda of nationalization of production and service units and providing universal ration and free universal service in health, education, etc. with people's participation for popular control over the services so that only use-value is created replacing the capitalist exchange-value. The communist revolutionary forces within the united front struggle must ensure that these minimum people's power is achieved whenever the liberal bourgeoisie occupy the citadel of state power for an interim period replacing the fascist forces, and the revolutionary seizure of power is still to be achieved.
Frontier Vol. 53, No. 22-25, Nov 29 - Dec 26, 2020
The Government policy of unplanned lockdown, the dilapidated health infrastructure, and health facility skewed in favour of the rich and the Government’s lack of intent in the building of mass-awareness and capacity for universal free healthcare facility to contain COVID pandemic for the fascination in promoting Hindutva ideology of the present dispensation had dismantled the banister which the party in power could catch hold of in the slippery slope of Indian economy. The Government allowed the COVID pandemic to snowball into a human disaster prioritizing the Hindutva agenda to pursue over the saving of lives and livelihood. Some observers foresaw the return to Keynesianism in the backdrop of global as well as national human disaster both due to COVID disaster and natural disaster for global warming. Both are the offshoot of the capitalist mode of production that creates a metabolic rift between humans and nature, and this is accentuated by the neoliberal policy persuasions. The so-called golden age of Keynesianism emerged from a human disaster of incomprehensible dimensions, but this time the return to Keynesianism seems implausible, the viable alternatives are barbarism or socialism. In the developing countries like India, the task for the democratization of state and society and to combat the activation of coercive state apparatuses to curtail democratic rights is ingrained within the overarching ambit of working-class struggle.
The Working Class and the left
In the pre-pandemic neoliberal global economy, we observed a massive extension of the service sector. This was because the capital could no longer be valorised in industrial production. The change and diversification of the consumption pattern facilitated capital accumulation in this sector. The service sector is ingrained in the capitalist production process for exchange for consumption due to the presence of diverse forms of mediation for the circulation of capital for the return of capital in the production process again. But the development of the service sector as an independent sector for profit and accumulation of capital is the latest development of capitalism and this sector recorded a huge boom in the neoliberal phase. The immense rise of the organic composition of capital both in the developed and developing countries due to the rise in fixed capital in comparison to variable capital has transformed a large amount of capital idle. The high rate of accumulation of capital in the few pockets of the capitalist class has a negative impact on consumer demand which leads to the crisis of over-production. When the production of consumer goods is curtailed due to lack of consumer demand, it subsequently also reduces the demand for production of means of production. The idle capital which does not find any profitable destination for investment has been transferred into the service sector which has developed in diverse forms of social and cultural dimensions. The service sectors do not add use-value to the commodities produced by productive labour, but merely add exchange values by the workers in service sectors at different levels to make the products available for the consumption of consumers. The transport sector transfers the commodity from one location to another for consumptions, the service workers add exchange values for the capitalist to accumulate profit at various points in space-time. But it is expected that the growth of service sector would stimulate the demand for the requirement of consumer goods e.g. if transport sector grows, it will create a demand for cars, if service for cultural consumption grows, it will create demand for more TVs, electronic appliances and other related goods. But the transfer of capital accumulated from the service sector to the productive sector has not happened. This accentuated the capitalist crisis and created a situation for both the production and service sector to collapse indicating the collapse of the capitalist economy itself. The left forces neglected the potential strength of the workers in service sectors to transform themselves into a revolutionary class and considered them as a precariat for routinised supportive activities. This is mainly due to the mechanical reading of the communist manifesto. This has become most glaring when the Indian migrant workers revolted against the system through an indirect and primitive form of mass exodus. The left then spelled out a language of criticism against the powers-that-be without formulating a strategy to lead this revolt from the front for a revolutionary transformation. There is another dimension of the left’s role in the present crisis. The old guards of the left circle have lost imagination and imbued with routinised activities and enjoyed satisfaction by glorifying their past deeds. The new guards are confused to think that every popular reaction is anti-systemic and only criticism of the power-that-be from above is the central focus for a revolutionary change.
Monetary and labour policy and its ramification
In this situation of a deep systemic crisis of the capitalist economy, the pandemic and lockdown caused the production and labour process to come to a halt and disrupted even the value chain of the service sector. The Indian Government reacted with the monetary policy of infusing bank credit money into the system. Crisil ratings are optimistic in stating that a slowdown in bank lending may be bottoming out this fiscal, while gross credit off-take may rise 8-9% year-on-year in fiscal 2021 backed by retail demand. The Bank loan may grow at about 6% this fiscal, the rating firm said.
But at the same time, corporate lending (excluding lending to NBFCs) is expected to remain subdued in fiscal 2020 and thereafter, may witness a slight uptick. Crisil projected a modest 2-3 percent rise in this segment, leading to a fall in its share in total bank credit to 48 percent at the end of March 2021 from 51 percent three summers back.
“Low capacity utilisation in the economy would keep private investments muted in the near to medium term, and the government’s mega-push to infrastructure will translate into credit growth only gradually,” Crisil said.
This means that the Government policy of extending credit money does not translate into productive investment, rather the capitalists accumulate more capital by selling their stock of products at inflated prices because the credit money flow into the economy caused inflation of consumer goods. The prices of medicines and health equipment along with other consumables are soaring. Consumer Spending in India decreased to 21250.99 INR Billion in the first quarter of 2020 from 21823.52 INR Billion in the fourth quarter of 2019. (https://tradingeconomics.com/india/consumer-spending). But India’s retail inflation measured by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose to 6.93 in the month of July as food prices continued to rise due to disruptions in supply chains, data furnished by the National Statistical Office (NSO) showed.
This inflationary pressure which facilitates the capitalists to increase their profit margin in the sale of accumulated stocks will further increase the income-inequality, but this does not result in productive investment and generation of employment. This is revealed in the data which shows that India’s industrial production slumped by 16.6 percent from a year earlier in June 2020, following a 33.9 percent plunge in the previous month and compared to market expectations of a 20.0 percent contraction. Manufacturing production shrank by 17.1 percent, mining output was down 19.8 percent and electricity supply dropped 10.0 percent. From April to June, industrial production tumbled 35.9 percent. (https://tradingeconomics.com/india/industrial-production). The monetary credit support in the domestic front even in the imperialist centers or the metropolis dries up the credit money required for promoting international trade. This is the reason why External Debt in India decreased to 558548 USD Million in the first quarter of 2020 from 563938 USD Million in the fourth quarter of 2019. (https://tradingeconomics.com/india/external-debt). Despite the fact that the people are living hungry or half-starved and the domestic demand for consumption of essential commodities are dwindling both due to increase in unemployment and the fall in real income for inflation, the agricultural exports rose 23% to Rs 25,553 crore in March-June this year despite the disruption caused by the pandemic. This indicates the continued flight of capital from India to metropolis for low-priced export in the backdrop of income-deflation of Indian toiling masses.
In the backdrop of the emerging signs of a shift from US centric globalization to China centric globalization, Indian Government’s expectation of a transfer of foreign investment from China to India in productive sector is misplaced. Form the global context, the value of labour-power in India is extremely low and it is lower than China. The policy of the Indian Government to further lower the value to attract the investors for a shift in destination from China to India in manufacturing sectors is extremely naïve, because the policy of labour arbitrage of the oligopolistic investors not only rely on the low-value of labour-power but also on productivity of labour. But the productivity of labour is however much higher in China than in India. Why productivity of labour is an important consideration for the investors along with the value of labour-power to make profit can be shown with a quite simple arithmetic. Let us suppose 100 number of items can be produced in a day by 10 number of workers with Rs.100 wage per worker for eight hours of work. It means 100 number of products are produced with a variable capital of Rs. 1000. But with enhanced productivity of workers, if the same number of products can be produced by 5 number of workers with Rs.110 wage per worker, the investment as variable capital comes down to Rs. 550. The productivity is increased with new machinery in means of production and this necessitates additional expenditures for skill development. To offset this disadvantage and to attract foreign and domestic capital investment, the Indian Government is inclined towards increasing the rate of exploitation of workers by increasing the daily working hours from 8 hours to 12 hours and by reducing the minimum wage. That is why Indian Government has proposed the amendment of existing labour laws. But this policy drive of the Indian Government is destined to fail in the backdrop of an overall crisis of capitalism when the investors are not kin on taking risk without being assured of profit and accumulation. This policy of the Government will further dampen the consumer demand and lead the country into further economic downslide.
The policy of super-exploitation of the toiling masses will keep the only option open for the ruling dispensation of transforming the state into an absolutist fascist state for their failure of even achieving the temporary revival of economy and containing the growing discontent in the minds of the people.
The need, desire, and dialectics
When the economy is showing the sign of deep systemic crisis due to the massive accumulation of capital, increased rate of the organic composition of capital and lack of transfer of credit money as capital to productive sectors for the rise of the average rate of profit by engaging the living labour with the dead labour, it can be presumed that the working class is simmering with mental agony developed from the need to achieve their lost status of living and livelihood. The transformation of this immediate need of the toiling masses into a revolutionary desire for radical change depends on the subjective forces and their strategic goal for the emancipation of the working class. This working class is not classical industrial working class alone, the large section of the migrants, the service workers, and the new technological mental workers who are losing jobs in largescale constitute the revolutionary class.
Jean-Paul Satre said in individual praxis as totalization, “…It is through need that the first negation of the negation and the first totalization appear in matter. Need is a negation of the negation in so far as it expresses itself as a lack within the organism and need is a positivity in so far as the organic totality tends to preserve itself as such through it. The original negation, in fact, is an initial contradiction between the organic and the inorganic, in the double sense that lack is defined in relation to a totality, but that a lacuna, a negativity, has as such a mechanical kind of existence, and that, in the last analysis, what is lacking can be reduced to inorganic or less organised elements or, quite simply, to dead flesh, etc. From this point of view, the negation of this negation is achieved through the transcendence of the organic towards the inorganic: need is a link of univocal immanence with surrounding materiality in so far as the organism tries to sustain itself with it; it is already totalising, and doubly so, for it is nothing other than the living totality, manifesting itself as a totality and revealing the material environment, to infinity, as the total field of possibilities of satisfaction….”
The existing capitalist crisis is not only the Kondratieff long cycle crisis or a deep structural crisis, but it also means the crisis of reproduction of labour and nature depending on which capitalism sustains through profit and accumulation. How the future will unfold itself and how the social relation of production remoulds itself based on the victory of either of the two combatants, labour and capital, will reveal itself in the human consciousness through praxis. It is the human praxis through which the Marxist dialectics become operative, not in a proven theoretical framework but as a process that begins with praxis. The human action is itself the negating transcendence of contradiction and that action in the form of praxis is the negation of transcendence of contradiction. The practicing humans who are part of the present can unveil the present not as totality, but as totalization in the name of future totality, the future is the transformation of the present into the future which again becomes the present as a totalization of another totality. The entire historical dialectic rests on individual praxis in so far as it is already dialectical.
Marxist Strategy
The formulaic version of Marxism debars the Marxist practitioners from continuously going deep into the changing dynamics of the social relation of production through praxis and act according to the need which appears as totalization to transform it into a desire of the toiling masses through befitting strategic and tactical action.
The present dispensation in power, while acting in favour of the capitalist through monetary measures, privatization and selling out of the public property to the private capitalists at through-away prices, is missing the bush in search of the trees and will soon lend into a quagmire for policy paralysis or coercive state apparatus by failing to revive the economy. The needs of the toiling masses and new working class thus generated due to degradation of their existing social status and living standard can only transform into a desire for radical change only through struggle and massive collective action which only the left forces can lead only through their deeper understanding of Marxist philosophy of praxis and strategic programme thereon. The left must come out of their reformist mindset and bargaining form of trade unionism for launching collective action against privatization and for socialisalisation of means of production and social welfare and employment.