AIFB for a New India -

AIFB for Netaji’s India ---

a Socialist India :

1. = With the historical resolution adopted at the All India Forward Bloc, National Council meeting held in Calcut= ta in 2003, the Party gave the clarion call to Rebuild India in Netaji's way. = To elaborate the idea of "India" that we are aiming at to rebuild through our relentless struggle under the leadership of the working class people, aided by the active participation of the progressive intellectual elements, we have been all along emphasing tha= t, that new India must be a "Socialist India" as had been dreamt of by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose. Right from the end of twenties of the last century, Netaji Su= bhas started advocating for establishing Socialism in India which he later clarifie= d as Socialism in Indian way under Indian conditions. With this innovative appro= ach towards Socialism, Subhas Chandra emerged as a distinctive personality in t= he arena of Indian politics and gave his bold and dynamic left leadership to t= he country to achieve the goal which he uniquely coined as the "socialist= ic reconstruction" of the country to be initiated immediately after obtai= ning freedom.

= Subhas Chandra didn't rest only after giving the call for socialistic reconstructi= on, but he started advocating and elaborating the concrete ways in which the planning and implementation should proceed for solving the age-old fundamen= tal problems' of the country and building a 'New Order' in the society.

= But the whole scenario had changed with Netaji's unprecedented revolutionary mo= ve to leave the country for launching a bigger armed struggle from outside with his INA for emancipation of the country. But during his physical absence fr= om the Indian soil, the left forces in India failed to rise unitedly= up to the desired level to further Netaji's planned anti-imperialist struggle. The right reactionary nationalist bourgeoisie took advantage of the situation a= nd conspired with the imperialist force to acquire power, at the cost of parti= tion of the country.

= The way in which this 'transfer of power' was effected, the real 'power' was not handed over to the 'people', and the obvious results followed. With the pro-capitalist anti-people policies of the ruling parties, the basic proble= ms and miseries of the majority of the people have not been solved, rather aggravated during the last couple of decades after independence.=

2.&nbs= p; In the backdrop of this historical perspective, in our 2003 National Council document, we analysed in detail the reasons of failure of the ruling parties tied up with capitalist and imperialist forces, and highlighted how they ha= ve deviated from the socialist reconstruction path shown by Netaji Subhas Chan= dra Bose. The obvious conclusion of the '2003 National Council' was that we must continue our relentless efforts for the success of a 'second revolution' th= at would materialize the socialist reconstruction programme conceived by Netaj= i. With a brief introduction of Netaji's unique concept of Socialism, the '2003 National Council', therefore, gave the clarion call to 'Rebuild India in Ne= taji's way.'

3.&nbs= p; With the passage of time since the '2003 National Council', India's ruling class moved further with their Second generation Economic Reforms, and thereby plunging the country in deep-rooted miseries and inequalities with increasi= ng gap between the limited 'haves' and a vast majority of 'have-nots'. On the other hand, during this intervening period, India has been further pushed towards the imperialist clique headed by America= . The economic imperialism in the name of globalisation has overpowered most of t= he developing countries including India. In fact, due to pro-imperialist policy of the ruling party, India is now forced to face the onslaught = of the world imperialist and capitalist powers headed by the USA. Imperialist capital and MNCs are intruding the vast Indian market which they are lavishly exploiting under the patronage of the govt. of India, = and repatriating the huge amounts of profits to their homeland. Big Indian corporate houses = are very often joining hands with the foreign capital and sharing the profits indiscriminately. This intrusion of foreign capital and joint exploitation = of India's resources, in collusion and partnership with the big domestic capital, are coming in the shape of Special Economic Zone (SEZ) or Corporate Entry in the retail market, causing ousting of millions of poor farmers and small trader= s of our country. We need to formulate our strategy of total opposition to this devastating aggression of Foreign and big domestic capital. We also need to analyze how our economy, our health, education and other social services, o= ur culture and heritage have been disastrously affected by the anti-people and pro-capitalist imperialist policies of the ruling party. We can substantiate our point by showing how the poverty and unemployment indices have gradually gone up and how it has facilitated an 'exclusive' growth of the rich at the cost of millions of hungry people, and thereby forcing the government now to talk of 'inclusive' growth in the approach paper for the 11th Five Year Pla= n.

= In the backdrop of the aforesaid analyses, we can further develop what Netaji Subhas Chandra actually conceived about his Socialist India and how widely = his Socialist Reconstruction Plan fundamentally differed from the measures taken under the last Five Year Plans. Our Alternative proposals based on Netaji's ideological directions may also highlight how and why the Centre's eleventh Five Year is deemed to meet the same miserable failure to ensure socio-econ= omic emancipation of the millions of downtrodden Indian people.

&n= bsp; The present document is prepared on the aforesaid step by step approach and political analysis and will thus be a supplement to our earlier '2003 Natio= nal Council' document giving the historical call to 'Rebuild India in Netaji's = way'. The present '2008 National Council' document will envisage a landmark peopl= es alternative for 'Building a Socialist India' as conceived and advocated by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose.

4.&nbs= p; What India is today after completion of ten Five Year Plans :

4.1&nb= sp; We have seen ten Five year plans, amendments of Constitution more than 100 times, number of commissions on different subjec= ts, policies and programmes, experienced different political ideologies and economic models and systems but the plight of the common people of India re= main as same even after all these exercises.

4.2 = India i= s under the strong grip of globalization. It has extended its tentacles to every sp= here of common man’s life. Globalization facilitates accumulation of capit= al by Indian corporates and creating band of capitalists. The advocates of liberalization are projecting = the so called bright spots of the Indian economy, such as high growth rate of GDP, massive build-up of foreign exchange reserves, booming capital markets, rap= idly growing services sector, rising imports, creeping inflation as an exercise = to conceal the grim and worsening reality.

4.3 = The UNDP’s annual Human Development Report, for instance, is enough to interpret the growing gap between the rising fortunes of the billionaire brigade of Shining India and the pathetic human development indices that characterize the real India. The human development index of the UNDP is a combined factor like life expectancy, school enrolment, public hygiene and standard of living. Accord= ing to the UNDP report of 2006, India is at the 126^=
th position in a list of 177 countries. This is t= he irony that the country accounts for the three among the world billionaires, remains home to half of the world’s poor and the starving people, whi= le nearly half of India= ’s children below five remain suffering from malnutrition.

4.4 = ; Under the impact of economic reforms of last fifteen years, the rupee got devalue= d to the extent of 91%. This devaluation has increased the costs of import of oi= l, fertilizers etc, and thus pushed up the prices of all commodities in the domestic market. The economic reforms have substantially reduced the subsid= ies on petroleum products. The cross–subsidy-pricing policy (more subsidy= to the items useful to the poorer sections than to the items used by the richer sections) has been abandoned. Of all the petroleum products, the price of diesel, which affects the cost structure in agriculture, transport and frei= ght, and of kerosene which is used by poorer sections have been raised. Therefor= e, after implementation of economic reforms, due to devaluation and reduction = in subsidies, the transport fares and freight have gone up steeply. Further reduction or withdrawal of subsidies on water, power, fertilizers, pesticid= es etc have increased the cost of agricultural production. Both these factors = are causing substantial increase in prices of all the essential commodities, fo= od grains, oils, vegetables, pulses, salt etc and bus/rail fares.

4.5 = The government always projects some figures about declining inflation, rising Foreign exchange reserve, FDI and so on. But in reality more than 300 milli= on people live below the poverty line of Rs. 10 per day, 450 million live below poverty line definition of World Bank i.e. $1 per day. 700 million people l= ive below poverty line of $ 2per day. These millions of people go to bed hungry every day. The average earning of an Indian is $1.44 per day (about Rs.65).= At the same time prices of essential commodities are skyrocketing. The prices = of Petroleum products have increased several times under the pretext of international market volatility.

4.6. = ; The practice of NEP has created a new phenomenon of ‘Jobless Growth’= ;. The net result of the NEP is that India has become the country of Asia’s b= iggest club of billionaires and half of the world’s poor as well. The latest Forbes list of global billionaires gives us the clear picture about this ne= w India. According to this list there are 946 billionaire families in the world today and there are as many as 36 Indian names in this club of the world’s wealthiest. This is 14 more than the number of Indians who had made it to t= he Forbes list last year, and the combined wealth of these 36 families amounts= to $191 billion, which is one – fourth of India’s GDP. The new billionaires have amassed wealth from media to computer software, from real estate to liquor. This stunning accumulation of private wealth is dividing = the country into two, i.e. the shining billionaires and the suffering Indians. = The much publicised reforms have increased discrimination in income and living standards both class-wise and regi= on wise.

4.7. According to World Wealth Report, in 2006 India had 1,00,015 people with a personal wealth in excess of at least $1million = (Rs. 4.1 Cr) each. In 2005, there were just 83000 such people.. What it means is this that in one year, the number of Indians getting richer grew at 20.5%, = as against the Chinese at 7.8%. This inequality draws the emerging picture of = how India i= s doing under liberalization after the so-called reforms have held sway over the economy for the last 15 years.

4.8. Corporate houses are now moving forward to assu= me many traditional functions and responsibilities of the state, including tho= se in sensitive areas like higher, professional and technical.

4.9. It has been noticed that through privatization, liberalization and globalization, an attempt has been made to change the ve= ry character of our polity and the concept of welfare state is being pushed in= to the garbage tank. The government has tried to disown its responsibilities in the field of education, health, employment, food and nutrition, social secu= rity and such type of essential services and leave it to the private sector. It = has created tremendous insecurity and instability in our country leading to gro= wing poverty and suicides.

4.10 The ruling class is blindly following the reforms agenda suggested by the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and the World Trade Organisatio= n. Due to this policy change, the rural India is languishing in severe unemployment and stagnant agriculture. The government records say that India&#= 8217;s foreign exchange reserve has crossed 210 billion dollar, the rate of annual growth of exports exceeds 25 % and the FDI has touched the figure of 15 bil= lion dollar in 2006-07. But all these ‘developments’ did make no cha= nge in the general plight of the common man of = India and raising a valid que= stion that these so-called developments are for whom? The main features of the developments and industrialization must be employment generation and econom= ic growth with equity

4.11. The Indian corporate sectors (like Mittal, Tatas, etc) have started = to purchase big industrial and trading units in foreign countries. Several Ind= ian companies have grown so strong that they have acquired several companies in developed countries and acquired the status of MNCs. If we calculate thoroughly, the Indian corporates are investing more in foreign countries compared to their domestic investments now-a-days. These capitalists are us= ing the Indian infrastructure, enjoying tax holidays on various counts and accumulating huge profit. But they are not re-investing these capital in India rather they are exporting. Due to this huge accumulation of profit they are acquiring high level of confidence to bid major companies over the globe. A= s a consequence of globalization, Indian MNCs are spreading over the globe and sharing economic power in the world. This out flow of Indian capital must be restricted.

4.12. The study conducted by National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) re= veals that overall poverty in India in 2004-05 was 28.3%. The rural poverty was 29.2% and urban was 26%. The sa= me study says that the per capita monthly income of rural Indian is Rs.356 and= the urban Indian is Rs.538.6

4.13. &nb= sp; Another development of great significance is the growth of the Indian Middle class. During the last six decades, Indian middle class, which is growing in numbe= r, has created a new circle in the society. The emergence of middle class paved the path for rapid consumer culture. The demand of the middle class for consumer durables viz., refrigerators, washing machines, micro ovens, vacuum cleaners, coolers, air conditioners, home theatres, DVDs, motor cycles, cars etc. has prompted the industrialists, particularly MNCs and monopoly capita= lists to make a systematic study of the size of the middle class. It was revealed that the middle class is growing at the rate of 15% per annum. The notable development due to the growth of the middle class is the creation of a new = life style based on new socio-economic culture. A major section of this class is falling in the trap of private banks and money lenders due to greediness an= d to keep the social status. This rapid growth of Indian middle class is confined more to the cities and metros. So it does not adequately promote inclusive growth, rather it leads to greater concentration of income in the urban are= as vis-à-vis rural areas.

4.14. Census data on living conditions indicate that the rural-urban divid= e is widening. Regarding housing facilities, urban areas have 79 percent houses, whereas this proportion in contrast is only 41 percent in rural areas. Moreover, temporary houses account for only 5 percent in urban areas, but t= heir proportion is as high as 23 percent in rural areas. Drinking water within t= he premises was available to only 25 percent of rural population, while the fi= gure of urban areas was 65 percent. In urban areas, 88 percent of households are electrified and only 12 percent use kerosene. In rural areas, only 43.5 per= cent of households have electricity and 55.6 percent depend on kerosene. Bathroom facility was available to 70 percent of urban households, but merely 23 per= cent rural households had this facilities. Only 26 percent of urban households h= ad no latrine, but as against it, 78 percent rural households did not have a latrine. In rural areas, only 4 percent of households had closed drainage, = 30 percent open drainage and 64 percent had no drainage. In urban areas, 19 percent of households did not own any of the specified assets, such as radi= o, television, telephone, bicycle, scooter/motor cycle/moped, car/jeep/van, bu= t in rural areas this percentage was 41 percent. Census of India (2001) has given a wake-up call to t= he Government that the development process has strengthened living conditions = in urban India to a much greater extent than in rural-India. The situation in some of the = poor and backward states is appalling. It is needed to direct the development process to strengthen rural-India and bridge the rural-urban divide.

5. Impact of globalization

&nb= sp; The Indian experience of globalisation is :-=

&= nbsp; * &= nbsp; Small scale and tiny industries are either wiped out or taken over and converted = into production units of MNCs.

&nb= sp; * &= nbsp; The application of high technology for the interest of corporate houses tends to reduce employment possibilities.

&nb= sp; * &= nbsp; Indiscriminate production and profligate consumption associated with the principle of liberalisation results in a rapid degradation of the environment.

&nb= sp; * &= nbsp; A kind of cultural homogeneity based on western fads and fashions has already started flourishing in Third World countries, including India.<= o:p>

&nb= sp; * &= nbsp; Inequality tends to increase at all levels and this has far reaching socio-economic and political consequences.

&nb= sp; * &= nbsp; Globalisation has put constraints on the capacity and scope of governments to control national policies. The domina= nt ideology of reliance on free market forces frowns upon the direct efforts of the state to improve the quality of life of its citizens.=

* = TNCs, which know no accountability, are determining the pattern of production and consumption as well as flow of capital information.

These imperialist designs have put the country’s economic sovereignty in to deep crisis. Liberalized globalized and private oriented economic policy of= the Union government has brought the country into the brink of collapse.

6. Declining rol= e of Govt. in Social Services :

6.1. In the era of globalization the role of governm= ent is declining in all social sectors. The government sources are proudly reporti= ng about the declining growth of agriculture and escalating growth of services= so far as GDP is concerned. More earning from service sector means the governm= ent is imposing more taxes and levies on services like education, health, transport, telecommunication, post and telegraph, water, electricity, etc. = It indicates that the government is relinquishing its responsibility to provide minimum needs of the people and handing over these sectors to the private capitalists. Privatizing social sectors is leading towards high rate of commercialization.

6.2&nbs= p; During the sixty years of capitalist developmen= t, India h= as the shameful distinction of having 32.88 crore illiterates, who constitute 50% = of world’s illiterates. Only 3% children of the relevant age group are provided with facilities to pursue higher education in India. = Without rectifying the above position, the privatization policy has made education a business preposition. Public investment in education is declining even after collecting special cess for education. Education for all is still a dream f= or Indian masses. But education at a high cost is being available to a handful= of privileged class.

6.3.<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> The ILO rep= ort notes that in Asia, unemployment and poverty is higher than in any other re= gion of the world, and that almost two thirds of the total estimated 1,3 billion poor people in the world, live in that region, mostly in South Asia. In the same report, it is also not= ed that conditions in the work market in Asia could deteriorate even further if the external economic environment turns hostile. In India unemployment has taken a menacing turn. The educated young people of India a= re reeling under utter frustration and falling into the trap of anti-national forces. The figures from the employment exchanges are not reflecting the re= al picture of unemployment. Rural unemployment and under employment are also t= o be considered while calculating the real figure of unemployment. Under employm= ent is more serious and pervasive problem prevalent in India. It is unfortunate that= in India, = there is no linkage between education and employment. We are producing IT technicians and engineers as per the demand of MNCs. But we are not giving training for carpenters, blacksmith, masons, mechanics, repairers etc. The Economic Surv= ey 2006-07 reveals that the public sector was shedding the load of surplus wor= kers and this resulted in a decline in public sector employment but it was expec= ted that the private sector, the so-called flagship of economic reforms would generate high rate of employment, but as facts reveal, private sector employment marginally increased from 0.44% to 0.61% per annum. It failed to compensate for the decline in public sector employment, resulting in negati= ve growth of employment in organized sector from 1.20% in 1983-84 to 0.38% dur= ing the period of 1994-2004.

6.4. = ; In health sector, the government is criminally ignoring and making the way for indiscriminate privatisation. The costly private hospitals and nursing homes are mushrooming throughout the country and exploiting the people without any limit. No state and central government is making appropriate legislations to control the private health centres. In the name of specialty clinics, the private corporates are taking advantage of ignorance of the people about medical sciences. The condition of the government hospitals and health care institutions are pathetic. Due to this negligence, India has become a land of all epidemics. We are unable to control even general diseases. Dengue, Chikungu= nea, Cholera, Malaria etc are becoming common phenomena in different states. The medicines for all these diseases are produced by the MNCs and most of the medicines are patented. Pharmaceutical companies are making huge profit as = they got Exclusive Marketing Rights (EMR) on their products. <= /p>

6.5. The rural India is suffering in compari= son with urban areas. More than 70% of the people are living in the rural areas= but the entire developmental programmes are concentrated in urban areas. Hundre= ds of villages in India= do not have proper roads, drinking water, electricity, education, health facilities, transport and nutritional food. This disparity creates social tension, which leads to extremism and even terrorism.

6.6&nbs= p; In respect of social development, tribal welfar= e and development, empowerment of women, child development and development of the physically and mentally handicapped people are to be considered as priority areas. But sixty years of our experience shows that the government is making only cosmetic policy announcements. Public policies in their areas should be framed in consultation with the experts in these fields and implementation = must be entrusted to dedicated and qualified administrators. <= /p>

6.7. The state structure of India is federal one. But in practice, most powers and resources are concentrated in the hands of the Un= ion government. Each state has its own culture, wealth, historical and geograph= ical specialties. Therefore, the states need more autonomy. But the Article 356 = of the constitution of = India is hanging as a Damocles’ sword over the states, which poses a serious threat on the autonomy of the state. More devolution of power, autonomy, adequate revenue share and unbiased approach on all interstate issues are necessary for maintaining a strong and healthy centre-state relation.<= /o:p>

6.8.&nb= sp; The globalization and liberalization process has created serious impact on culture of India. The MNCs sponsored new consumer culture and fast life system which are destroying the very basic fabrics of Indian Culture. The communication and technology revolution has penetrated into the drawing room of each and every Indian family. But unfortunately along with minimum positive aspects, this revolution is making a new society devoid of any national and human feeling. The powerful media is acting as a second fiddle= for the MNCs and imperialist forces for financial benefits. Diversification of culture is the strength of India. Any monolithic approach will destroy the very fabric of unity in diversity.=

6.9. The total planning process must be revamped. It= is unfortunate that no serious attempts have been made to dig out the reasons = for non-implementation of government schemes within the stipulated time. The government is accepting and encouraging the development programmes proposed= by the conglomerates of Indian capitalist such as CII, FICCI, ASSOCHAM etc. the common people are not getting an opportunity to take part in the process of planning. Thus a vast majority of Indian mass has been deprived of their democratic rights. People’s participation in the local area developme= nt must be ensured. Ind= ia need a peoples’ democratic planning instead of capitalist model of planning.

7. &= nbsp; Faulty Planning ---- Wrong Approach :

7.1 = Stagnation in Agriculture :

&= nbsp; 7.1.1. Indian agriculture is facing = severe crisis. Low public investment and inadequate price realizations relative to rising input costs –leading to stagnant capital formation even at the farmer’s end- over the last one and half decades are the main reasons behind this crisis. The government target of agricultural growth during the Ninth and the Tenth Plan was at 4% per annum, but in practice realized 2.7%= in the 9^th Plan and only 1.7= % in the Tenth Plan.

&= nbsp; 7.1.2. Close to 70% of India&#= 8217;s population is dependent on agriculture. In 1981, 25% Indians were landless agriculture workers. In 2002, this figure stood at 40%. This means millions= of poor farmers have been forced to become landless workers. Farmers who owned smallholdings have had to give up their land. In 1981 the average workdays available for agriculture worker was 123. In 1999 it was down to 100. It plummeted to 72 in 2003. In the rural agriculture economy there is an alarm= ing decline in the average workdays. For marginal farmers agriculture has become non-profitable. This is reflected in the absolute increase in the number of agriculture workers between 1993 and 2003, from 7.46 crore to 10.46 crore. There is more hunger in rural India and consequently more migration of the landless agriculture workers to the cities.

&= nbsp; 7.1.3. The agriculture sector, which contributes a quarter of the gross domestic product (GDP), provides direct employment to about 57% of the total workforce and supports two-thirds of t= he total population, receives just 1.3% of the total investment in the economy. The most worrying fact is that the public sector investment has come down f= rom 17.7% to 6.1% during this period. Declining public investment in the agriculture sector is a serious issue because it is not only critical for t= he development of the agriculture infrastructure but also for attracting priva= te sector investment in the sector.

&= nbsp; 7.1.4 The number of agricultu= re labourers has increased from 27 million in 1951 to 107 million in 2001, a nearly four-fold rise. Consequently their share in the total workforce has = also increased from 19.5% to 26.7% during the same period.

&= nbsp; 7.1.5 Investment in agricultu= re has also been reduced in every plan period. It was 6.5% in 6^th Plan, 5.8% in 7^th Plan, 5.2% in 8^th Plan and only 5% in 9^th Plan. The budgetary support for agriculture is only 2.6% in the year 2002-03. The agriculture department had sought an outlay of Rs.18, 233 crore for the Ninth Plan but was provided Rs. 7813 crore, only 43 %. Again during the 10^th Plan, as against a demand of Rs. 25,000 crore, Rs. 13000 crore was given, a little over fifty percent. Further, against the projected demand of Rs. 5164 crore for 2002-03, Rs. 2167 crore was allocated.

&= nbsp; 7.1.6 In 1950-51, agriculture contributed 61% to I= ndia’s GDP. In 2001-02 it was down to 24.2%. In 2005-06 it was further declined to 19.6%. The dependence on agriculture as source of revenue has declined beca= use of the increase in the contribution of manufacturing and services sector, b= ut the number of people who are dependent on agriculture has only declined marginally from 77% to 69%. While the pressure on agriculture as an employm= ent generation sector for rural India has increased, the rural economy has almost collapsed.

&= nbsp; 7.1.7 Agricultural policies t= hat push the small farmer to destitution on the one hand, and promote cash crop= ping on the other, have resulted in lowered food production. There has been a st= eady decline in food production since the early ’90s, as a result of the thrust towards export-oriented agriculture. The collapse of domestic support f= or food production (through dismantling the MSP, rising costs of inputs, crop failure due to uncertified seeds) in the late 90s has intensified this shif= t, as farmers are desperate to recover their losses. The country is already facing a de= cline in food production to the order of 12.8% in just one year.

&= nbsp; 7.1.8 Between 1996-97 and 200= 1-02, the government increased the Minimum Support Price of paddy by 39.5% and wh= eat by 30.5%. In comparison, the government increased the cost of electricity by 73.1% and price of diesel by 108.1%.

&= nbsp; 7.1.9 Still the agriculture is dependent on rainfall, only around 40% of the total cropped area in the cou= ntry is irrigated, hundreds of villages do not have access to electricity and drinking water, lack of proper remunerative prices, etc. are making ugly the face of rural India.

&= nbsp; 7.1.10 The impact of the new agriculture p= olicy has been to promote a shift from food grains to vegetables and perishable commodities. While grains can= be stored and consumed locally, potatoes and tomatoes must be sold immediately. A vegetable cent= red policy thus decreases food security and increases farmer’s vulnerabil= ity to the market. While this pro= motes monocultures of perishable commodities, the word used for these monoculture= s is “diversification” in typical globalisation doublespeak.

&= nbsp; 7.1.11 The NSSO data shows that over 40% o= f the farmers are keen to quit farming. It is a continuation of the tragedy of ru= ral distress that has been driving about one lakh farmers over the last eight y= ears to commit suicide as the way out of their interminable woes.

&= nbsp; 7.1.12 India is losing its biologica= l and genetic resources, the basic wealth of our country, and the biodiversity ba= sed knowledge of our local communities mainly through biopiracy. The piracy and patenting of our rich biodiversity by the MNC’s, institutions and individuals especially from the Western world is inflicting great injury to= the natural resources of our land and people. If this is not arrested by appropriate legislation or other policy measures, there would be incalculab= le damage done to the nation and the coming generations.

&= nbsp; 7.1.13 Three core areas of policy shift are destroying the fragile fabric of ecological security, livelihood security a= nd food security creating ecological devastation and deepening hunger and pove= rty.

&= nbsp; 7.1.14 India joined the WTO in 1995.= Since then, Indian agriculture has been subjected to a number of policy changes s= uch as reduction in import duties on agricultural products, removal of minimum export price, lifting of Quantitative Restrictions (QRs), entry of foreign direct investment (FDI) in food processing and marketing up to 100% equity, direct involvement of the corporate sector in highly capital intensive farm= ing like floriculture, private sector participation in agricultural R&D, technology transfer, extension and marketing, changes in the laws of tenancy and leasing of land in order to achieve economies of scale, rationalization= of stamp duties on agricultural land transactions and promotion of contract farming. All these policy changes have impacted our farmers and farming processes.

&= nbsp; 7.1.15 On 1^st April 2001 India compl= etely removed the Quantitative Restrictions (QRs) on imports from all 1429 items = as per the bilateral agreement with the United States. Quantitative Restrictions on imports in respect of 714 items have already been removed w= ith effect from 1/4/2000.

&= nbsp; 7.1.16 QRs were being maintained ever sinc= e 1947 on balance of payments (BOP) grounds under the General Agreement on Tariffs= and Trade (GATT) to which India was a signatory. Ind= ia participated in the 7-year long Uruguay Round Negotiations (1986-1993) which culminated in the signing of the Uruguay Round Agreement in April 1994 and became a founder member of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), which came i= nto being in January 1995. India subscribes to all the WTO Agreements, but continued to maintain QRs on BOP grounds as per the provisions of Article XVIII-B of GATT. Till 31^st March 2000 the quantitative restrictions were maintained on balance of paym= ent ground on 1429 items out of which 700 items were under Restricted List, 685 items were under SIL (Special Import License) list and there were 44 items under canalized list. In Apri= l 1999 about 1285 items were already shifted to the open general license (OGL) lis= t.

&= nbsp; 7.1.17 Transnational agribusiness giants a= re, in fact, the only beneficiaries from the liberalization of imports and removal= of import restrictions in agricultural products. They benefit both from using their immense financial clout to depress world prices during procurement and hike it during sales, as well as from the various subsidies that are given = to them for both exporting as well as importing, from both the countries which export and the ones that import.

&= nbsp; 7.1.18 A major impact of trade liberalisat= ion policies has been a general lowering of food consumption. The per capita ce= real consumption has declined from 17 kg per month in the 1950s to 13.5 kg per capita per month in the 1990s. The National Nutrition Monitoring Bureau data shows a declining trend in consumption in Rural India, particularly in cere= al and millets, the main source of energy for the poor. The most important rea= sons for the decline are:

&n= bsp;  Rising food prices

= = ; = Destruction of livelihoods

= = ; = Destruction of the PDS system

= = ; = Shift to export oriented agriculture

&= nbsp; 7.1.19 The reduced consumption on the one = hand, and the decline in agricultural production and procurement on the other are directly linked though the Food and Agricultural policies of the government. Colonialism had destroyed the food sovereignty of the country, forcing chan= ges in cropping from food for local and regional food security to commercial cr= ops. Each period of large exports has been followed by acute food shortage, and = India h= as had to import the same grain again, often at higher prices.

&= nbsp; 7.1.20 Commercialization of agriculture th= rough contract farming is a new policy initiative in the country. In the present = era of trade liberalisation and expanding agri – business, the small and marginal farmers in = India may find themselves incapable of participating in the market economy due to constraints such as lack of essential inputs, scarcity of reasonable credit, technical guidance and marketing support. In India several big companies, such as Pepsi Foods, Kellogg, Cadbury India, = ITC, Reliance and Cargilll have already entered into contract farming. As contra= ct farming is an agreement between unequal partners, there is always the possibility of exploitation of farmers by the big companies. This must be stopped.

&= nbsp; 7.1.21 Therefore, in order to make the small and marginal holdings economically viable and to provide productive employment to farmers, we have to evolve a farming syste= m, which is better than corporate and contract farming. Effective participatio= n of cooperative institutions in various facets of agriculture may be a better option. Another alternative could be the promotion of collective farming am= ong small and marginal farmers through self-help groups.

&= nbsp; 7.1.22 The policy changes induced by trade liberalisation include:

= ·= ; &= nbsp; Dismantling of the FCI and reducing its role in procurement from farmers;

= ·= ; &= nbsp; Removal of Quantitative Restrictions on imports of food and agricultural products;<= o:p>

= ·= ; &= nbsp; The amendment of the Public Distribution System, to cater only to the ‘Be= low the Poverty Line’ (BPL) category of the population;=

= ·= ; &= nbsp; Increase in the central issue price, from Rs. 450/quintal in April 1995, to Rs. 682 = quintal in April 1999, and to Rs. 900/quintal in 2000; and

= ·= ; &= nbsp; Increased price of food available through the Targeted PDS to the BPL as a result of transferring 50% of the procurement and distribution costs of the governmen= t to this category.

= ·= ; &= nbsp; Government procurement centres refusing to purchase food grains from farmers.

= ·= ; &= nbsp; The refusal of the government to enforce Minimum Support Price (MSP) on private traders and corporations, forcing farmers into distress sale of food grains= at costs far below production costs.

= ·= ; &= nbsp; Dumping of cheap subsidized agricultural products by other countries in the Indian market, lowering farm prices.

= ·= ; &= nbsp; Increasing price of farm inputs, including seed.

&n= bsp; · &= nbsp; Liberalizing seed regulations to allow private seed companies sell uncertified seed.

&= nbsp; · &= nbsp; Deepening of farmers’ debt, increased mortgages and land alienation, increased destitution, suicides and sale of body parts among farmers.

= 7.1.23<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'> &= nbsp; The Approach Paper to the 11th Five Year Plan (Planning Commission, Govt. of In= dia) rightly admits the crisis situation and gives the caution note :

= &nb= sp; "The crisis of stagnation in agriculture needs urgent attention. This sector sti= ll provides livelihood to nearly 60 percent of our people and remains vital for food security. To ensure a better life for women and men engaged in agriculture, it is necessary to double the growth rate achieved in 10th Plan and put agriculture on a growth path of around 4 percent. To do this and at= the same time maintain prices and profitability, a corresponding increase in de= mand for agricultural output matched with the supply side response based on productivity improvements is required."

= 7.1.24<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'> &= nbsp; The aforesaid paper further states ---------- "In recent years our farmers have been hesitant in expanding production because (a) per capita domestic = food consumption has stagnated in recent years and (b) world prices turned weak = for many crops. Consequently agricultural product prices received have failed to keep pace with overall inflation and production costs, thus reducing farm profitability."

= 7.1.25<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'> &= nbsp; We may also quote from the document of 2002-03 ----- Farm Survey, which says 94 percent of the farmer households belong to holdings of less than four acres. This is the fate of the 'aam janta' of agriculture. More alarmingly, institutional credit generally does not reach the marginal and small farmer= s. The rich farmers are only benefited. To make the situation still worse, only 1.8 percent of the total investment in India goes to agriculture. Wh= en the total investment in the country is 34 per cent of GDP, out of that only 1.8 percent goes to agriculture and only one quarter of that is public investme= nt. Only this meager public investment may reach the large section of small far= mers holding below 4 acres of land. Hence, they are in deep crisis. Agricultural crisis is entirely created by faulty government policies. As Netaji Subhas Chandra called for (as early as in 1938) development of 'scientific agricul= ture', the UPA government must use the social benefit aspect of public investment = by investing more in irrigation, water management and land development. <= /o:p>

= 7.1.26<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'> &= nbsp; We may quote firm 'Economic Survey 2006-07' figures on Annual average growth r= ate of agriculture, which show how miserable is the present agricultural performance :

= &nb= sp; = Total : Annual average growth rate (per cent)

= Five Year Plan	= Overall GDP growth rate	= Agriculture & allied sectors' growth rate
= Seventh Plan(1985-90)	6.0	3.2
= Annual Plan (1990-92)	3.4	1.3
= Eighth Plan (1992-97)	6.7	4.7
= Ninth Plan (1997-2002)	5.5	2.1
= Tenth Plan (2002-07)	7.6	2.3
= 2002-03	3.8	-7.2
= 2003-04	8.5	10.0
= 2004-05	7.5	0.0
= 2005-06	9.0	6.0
= 2006-07	9.2	2.7

7.2 In= dustry : Jobless Growth

&= nbsp; 7.2.1 It is true that industr= ial sector has grown in many ways during the last fifteen years. But this growth has not helped growth in employment, thereby causing livelihood crisis of millions of poor people. Organised manufacturing sector, although produces two-third of whole production, employs only 12% of the whole workforce enga= ged in manufacturing. Labour intensive mass manufacturing based on relatively l= ower skill levels may provide an opportunity to expand employment in the industr= ial sector. China has done exceptionally well in this area and has opened up the world market= .

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The Eleventh Five Year Plan approach Paper has assessed the situation as such : "Indian manufacturing is highly dualistic, with the organised sector producing 67% of manufacturing value added but employing only 12% of all workers in manufacturing. Unfortunately, although employment in the unorgan= ised manufacturing sector has expanded, it has not increased at all in organised manufacturing after mid - 1990s. At the same time labour productivity has hardly increased in unorganised manufacturing while organised manufacturing= has increased this at about 10% per annum by increased use of capital but with fewer employees".

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Incidentally it is noted with concern that the Planners are advocating to amend some of = the existing labour laws as they think those to discourage the creation of employment opportunities in the organised manufacturing sector. But we warn, again this would be a wrong approach, as it would open the flood gate for more exploitation and depriving the workers of their hard-earned rights.

7.3. Falling Employment and Increasing Povety.

&= nbsp; 7.3.1 Falling rate of empl= oyment :

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 'The Economic Survey 2006-07' reveals that ------- "Employment growth in the organised sector, public and private combined, declined during the nineties. Annual employment growth in establishments covered by Employment Market Information System of Ministry of Labour decelerated from 1.20 percent duri= ng 1983-1994 to -0.38 percent per annum during 1994-2004, as is shown in the following Table":

Table : Annual Growth of Employment in Organi= sed Sector(in per cent)
	1983 - 1994	1994 - 2004
Public Sector	1.53	-0.80
Private Sector	0.44	0.61
Total Organised	1.20	-0.38

= &nb= sp; 'The Economic Survey 2006-07' further reveals ---------- "Net annual additi= on to employment on Usual Principal Status (UPS) basis went up from 5.47 million during 1993-94 to 1999-2000 to 9.58 million during 1999-= 2000 to 2004-2005. Simultaneously, however, according to the 61st round estimate= s, during 1999-2000 to 2004-05, labour force grew even faster at an annual = 2.54 per cent compared to annual employment growth of 2.48 per cent. = As a result, despite the faster growth of employment, unemployment (on UPS ba= sis) was higher at 3.06 per cent of the labour force in 2004-05 compared to = 2.78 in 1999-2000, as is indicated in the following Table :"

Table : Employment and Unemployment = (in million)
	1983	1993-94	1999-2000	2004-05
Labour Force	277.34	343.56	377.88	428.37
Workforce	269.36	334.54	367.37	415.27
Number of Unemployed	7.98	-9.02	10.51	13,10
As a proportion of labour force in p= er cent
Unemployment rate	2.88	2.62	2.78	3.06

= &nb= sp; The 'Economic Survey 2006-07' highlights another important aspect. It states th= at to absorb all new entrants into the labour force every year, non-agricultur= al employment is needed to increase at over 6 per cent per annum during the 11= th Plan. It poses a major challenge, and the present trend of generating non-agricultural employment hardly gives us any hope to meet this challenge. The Survey report says --- "As per the figures published by Annual Sur= vey of Industries, there was a decline in the absolute number of persons engage= d in the organised manufacturing sector between 1987-88 and 2003-04. ... Profitability (i.e. share of profits in the net value added) during the per= iod 1987-88 to 2003-04 increased substantially from 11.6 per cent to 45.5 per c= ent, while share of wages came down from 56.4 percent to 35.7 per cent. With a b= ias towards capital- intensive technology, there was a drop in total employment= in the sector. The trend of sluggish employment growth in organised manufactur= ing is also corroborated by the lackluster performance of the historically labo= ur intensive manufacturing sub-sectors like leather, food products, jute and j= ute product in more recent years."

= &nb= sp; Precisely, it can be said that unemployment is increasing. From some corner it is wron= gly claimed that the overall rate of growth of employment is about 2.3 per cent. But it is very important to note that the rate of growth of employment in t= he organised sector is negative. In the organised sector, manufacturing sector= is growing at a fast rate of 10 to 11 per cent. But this growth in manufactures takes place with negative growth of employment. In reality, employment is increasing in the unorganised sector. And what is this unorganised sector. = It is the sector where there is no minimum wages, where there is no labour law= s, where there is no social security. People are working there without water, without light, without shelter. They are working in such adverse situation, because without working they would starve. This is the fallacy of growth publicized by the government. To sum up the situation, 11th Plan Approach p= aper says ------ "Employment growth accelerated to 2.6% during 1999-2005 outpacing population growth. But the average daily status unemployment rate, which had increased from 6.1% in 1993-94 to 7.3% in 1999-2000, increased further to 8.3% in 2004-05."

= 7.3.2.<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> Increasing Poverty

= &nb= sp; The provisional data of the latest National Sample Survey (NSS) 61st Round for = the year 2004-05 indicate that the poverty ratio at the national level was 27.8 percent if the Uniform Recall Period (URP, in which the consumer expenditure data for all the items are collected from a 30-day recall period) is used, = and about 22 percent if the Mixed Recall Period (MRP, in which the consumer expenditure data for five non-food items, namely, clothing, footwear, durab= le goods, education and institutional medical expenses, are collected from a 365-day recall period) is used.

7.4.&n= bsp; Education & Health Services : Far from Necessity Target

= 7.4.1.<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> The UPA Government has on them three main commitments in respect of Education : one, at the international level, 'Education for All', under the NCMP, increasing public expenditure on education to 6 percent of GDP; two, universalizing elementary education and three, under the Constitution's 86th Amendment, making available free and compulsory education to all children in the age group of 6-14 years. The government has failed to fulfill all the three commitments. Moreover, they = have levied special education cess twice, at the rate of 2% and then 1%, and sti= ll lagging behind to raise education-expenditure up to 6% of GDP, which was 3.= 74% in 2003-04. State/UTs have reported that as on March 31, 2006, there were 7= 0.5 lakh children in the 6-14 age-group who were not enrolled in a school. The = goal of the National Literacy Mission (NLM) to achieve sustainable threshold literacy rate of 75 per cent by 2007. The 2001 Census Report indicates the literacy rate as 64.84 per cent. The situation is made still worse due to distressingly growing trend of commercialisation and privatisation of education, which has deprived the millions of poor people access to quality education. The 'Economic Survey 2006-07' states -------- "As per NSSO survey (55th round 1999-00), there were in-equalities in enrolment in higher education across various social groups in rural and urban areas, and also in terms of gender. Women belonging to SCs and STs and those living in rural a= reas are the most disadvantaged."

= 7.4.2.<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> The position of Health Servic= es in India is equally far from satisfactory and= in comparison to other countries, India's status in Health Services is quite disappointing. 'Economic Survey 2006-07'= highlights ------ "India's position on health parameters compared even to some of its neighbors contin= ues to be unsatisfactory. India compares poorly not only with China and SriLanka, but also Bangladesh and Nepal with respect to some indicators."

= &nb= sp; In his 'socialistic reconstruction' plan, Netaji Subhas repeatedly emphasised = that alleviation of poverty & unemployment, illiteracy and ill-health should= be of priority necessity for our country. But unfortunately, even after 60 yea= s of independence India failed to achieve necessary success in these priority areas. This failure is due to faulty planning and wrong approach to our priority problems.

8.&nbs= p; Further anti-people measures only to facilitate pro-rich 'Exclusive' growth:

= 8.1. SEZ is detrimental to interests of the country :

= &nb= sp; Special Economic Zone(SEZ) has emerged as the biggest land-grab measure in recent times. Huge areas of farmlands are being acquired to set up SEZs, with the purported purpose of strengthening the industrial growth and export, and th= ereby generating greater economic activity and employment. But in practice it is found to be a shrewdly designed measure to reestablish the Zamindari system providing ownership gift of huge quantity of farm land to private enterpris= es, including both domestic and foreign corporate houses, causing eviction of p= oor farmers and other sections of common people and at the same time endangering our country's food security. The SEZ companies are also provided with huge amount of tax and duty exemptions, along with other financial benefits, cau= sing a loss of large quantum of national revenue which may even go up to Rs. 1,90,000 crores over the next four years. They have also been offered exemptions from various provisions of labour laws of the countries. SEZs ar= e appearing as foreign territories within the country, creating a group of privileged business class. All India Forward Bloc strongly opposes the setting up of S= EZ and calls for country-wide agitation to abolish them. As the Party opposed = the NDA government's policy of disinvestment of public sector industries, it al= so opposes the UPA government's policy of SEZ. Both are pro-rich policies and = are detrimental to the interest of the country.

= &nb= sp; The Special Economic Zones Act was passed by Parliament in May 2005, and subsequently being supported by SEZ Rules, came into effect on 10 Feb, 2006. Since its inception, the government has so far approved 386 SEZs (as on 31.8.2007) and has given in-principle approval to another 183 SEZs. And alm= ost every month, the government is merrily granting more and more SEZs, which a= re causing serious concern for the country's economy, agricultural production = and the fate of thousands of poor farmers. The total number of SEZs in China s= tands at six only and 2000 in the whole world. But the UPA government has surpassed = all records of growth of SEZ, with the ulterior motive to serve the interests of the big domestic and foreign Capital, although on a misleading pretext of alluring growth of industry, export, employment and investment. Incidentall= y it may be mentioned that we have many other better and more plentiful alternat= ive sources of exports and output/employment in the form of the SSI sector. It accounts for 35% of total direct exports giving employment to about 200 lakh people. If SSI can create so much export earnings, and without anything like the costs entailed by the SEZs, it is hard to understand why the government= is ignoring this sector. Many Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) clusters have faired very well. According to an estimate, over 60% of the Indian manufacturing exports are generated from SME clusters. Hence the SSI/SME cluster development is a better option than the excessively costly and destabilizing development of SEZs.

= &nb= sp; The Forward Bloc rejects this SEZ model of industrialization and pleads for an integrated policy of development for all categories of human settlement, ru= ral and urban, in order to ensure economic growth, increased employment, social cohesion and environmental sustainability.

= &nb= sp; Acquiring agricultural land for non-agricultural purpose is totally unacceptable. SEZ= s at the expense of fertile land will ring the death-knell of agriculture, along with the poor farmers, and the begging bowls for food grains of the 1960s w= ill reappear. We welcome industrial growth, but not at the cost of agriculture.= We reiterate the demand, as voiced by Netaji Subhas, that India m= ust go for 'scientific agriculture' and 'modern industry' simultaneously and cohesively.

= 8.2 FD= I and Corporate Entry in Retail must be stopped :

= &nb= sp; Central Government's policy to allow Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in retail trade will not only harm the interest of 5 crore small traders and shopkeepers, mostly self employed, across the country, it will also be detrimental to the interests of the country as a whole. Along with the interests of the retail= ers, people from other sections like farming, cooperatives, non-corporate service sectors will also be adversely affected, leading to large scale unemploymen= t in the country. According to estimates, the retail trade in India is contributing about 10% of GDP and= is generating employment of about 25 million people which counts to nearly 8% = of the labour force in = India. It is apprehended that once the MNCs and big corporate houses get entry into the retail market, they will eventually throw domestic retailers out of business, creating afresh a huge unemployed brigrade, as well as affecting = the consumers due to lack of competition. In such a situation and apprehension, AIFB totally oppose FDI in retail trade. Impact of the corporate entry, eve= n in selected segments of retail trade of transnational supermarkets is also lik= ely to be adverse on the livelihood of small-scale retailers and vendors. Sunil Mittal of Bharti group is making move to partner with the biggest US reta= il chain Wal-Mart, which is now entering the Indian market through back-door. The US comp= any would restrict itself to "back-end" of the joint venture and would not manage the front end in which 100% FDI is barred till now. Ultimately, = the government may succumb to the pressure of American and European MNC lobby.<= o:p>

= &nb= sp; The world's biggest multinational retail chain Wal-Mart is thus making backdoor entry to Indian Market through Cash and Carry business with Bharti which wi= ll run Wal-Mart's stores from the front. Other European companies like Metro of Germany, Tesco of UK, Carrefour of France are following the footsteps of Wal-Mart. India's retail sector with 5% compounded annual growth rate is fastest growing industries of the day. Recently developed urban consumerism= and an upswing in rural consumption are adding fuel to increase the growth rate around 7% - 8% in near future and would make it a potential lucrative market for the MNCs.

= &nb= sp; Incidental= ly, it is noted that Bharti has announced an investment of $2.5 billion in the multi product retail sector with Wal-Mart as a key partner. It is apprehend= ed that the chain of stores backed by foreign funds would drive out hawkers and small traders, as was the case in Mexico and Japan. Moreover, it is reported that Wal-Mart's credentials for following ethical labour practices are also suspect.

= &nb= sp; When the government is unable to offer employment opportunities to millions of unemployed youths, MNCs can not be allowed to enter the retail markets, with the dangerous possibility of aggravating the situation by creating further unemployment. All India Forward Bloc, therefore, launches countrywide campa= ign against the government's move to allow FDI in retail trade.

= 8.3 Big domestic and foreign capital intruding agri-marketing :

= &nb= sp; While the FDI in retail trade is posing a serious threat to the lives and livelih= ood of crores of poor and middle class people engaged in various types of retail business, quite a few giant corporate houses are now spreading their greedy= hands into the vast area of marketing of agricultural product and petty consumer articles which were so far being traditionally handled by the small farmers themselves, along with millions of small traders, shopkeepers suppliers, agents, rice mill and cold storage workers, and the retail direct sellers of the village 'haats' or urban markets. This entry of corporate houses into retail business is in fact threatening a devastating unequal competition between the domestic as well as foreign capital invested by a handful of monopoly business houses and on the other hand millions of small farmers, traders and retailers, having a meager amount of small savings in their individual pockets. The obvious consequences would be complete ouster of th= ese millions of poor and middle class people from their meager sources of earni= ngs. These aggressive threats on the livelihood of millions of commoners are com= ing from no less than the capitalist groups like giant Indian corporate houses = viz. Relliance, Forte ITC, RPG, Bharti and others or the big MNCs like Walmart, Montesa and others. These corporate houses are now building up giant shoppi= ng malls, like Reliance Fresh and others, which are collecting agricusltural produce direct from the producers and thus depriving other distributors or agents to avail of this opportunity. Many other small shopkeepers and trade= rs are also forced to become idle for want of business. Corporate Houses are further resorting to contract farming forcing the poor farmers to more exploitation. Corporate houses are thus enjoying all privileges of monopoly business, while the consumers are forced to pay higher prices and thousands= of small traders are thrown out of business. Forward Bloc strongly opposes this unfair monopoly business and resists the entry of corporate houses like Reliance or Walmart into agricultural marketing business. With strong determination, Forward Bloc has come forward to organise resistance movemen= ts throughout the country to safeguard the interests of small farmers, middle = class consumers and millions of small traders and shopkeepers.<= /p>

9.&nbs= p; Call for 'Inclusive' growth ------ an excuse for 60 years' failure :

= &nb= sp; Pri= me Minister Manmohan Singh is now pleading for an "inclusive growth"= of the society after a long spell of Congress-raj for many decades. What a splendid confession now the PM is making on the 60th anniversary of independence. He states ------ "Our economy is now growing at historic= ally unprecedented rates. However, we can not become a nation with islands of hi= gh growth and vast areas untouched by development, where the benefits of growth accrue only to a few. This is good neither for our society nor for our polity." This is exactly what we have been saying during the last two decades. But the Government did not care to listen to us. Now a prime leade= r of the government and the Congress party cannot justifiably make such candid submissions, as it is he or they who have been responsible for all such une= ven and exclusive growth. Since 1992, long 15 years ago, when they have started imposing on the Indian people, Economic Reforms, this un-inclusive growth h= ave started, creating a handful of privileged class and depriving a vast majori= ty of poor people. Hence, the responsibility is theirs, the responsibility is = of the entire Congress regime during the post-independence period, responsibil= ity is of their faulty planning and their pro-rich approach. The onus, therefor= e, lies on Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to first publicly admit the faults of their planning and their wrong approach to development. Then, and only then= , he can make such confessions and swear to make a new beginning with a new pro-people approach.<= /span>

= &nb= sp; But the ruling Congress party and the UPA government can not make such move, as their class character is basically against the poor and the toiling masses. Emancipation of the majority of the people of India and achievement of a Socialist India will never be possible until and unless the ruling capitali= st regime, wedded with world imperialist hegemony, can be ousted by united peo= ple's movement. With fulfillment of objective and subjective conditions, this movement may eventually lead to socialist revolution and form a Socialist I= ndia as advocated by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose.

10.&nb= sp; Political scenario : Capitalist Polarisation vis-a-vis Third Front/People's Front

= 10.1. Historical perspecti= ve :

= &nb= sp; As explained earlier, nationalist bourgeoisie came to power in India i= n 1947, through conspiracy with the imperialist power and at the cost of partition = of the country. Since then, Indian capitalism, in collusion with world capital= ism, gradually put their hold on ruling power stronger, mainly because the left democratic forces and the working class movement of the country could not consolidate sufficiently to dislodge, barring a few occasions, the pro-capitalist bourgeoisie government from power. But due to inner contradictions and inherent rivalry within the capitalist camp, two major opposing factions emerged in the form of Congress and BJP, although their c= lass character remain the same, inspite of having a tilt towards communalism of = the BJP group. The situation has thus favoured an option for bipolarisation in Indian politics, which has got voluntary support both from the Indian as we= ll as the world capitalist forces led by American imperialist. The strategy of= the finance capital was very clear, as they were fully assured that whoever of = the two came to power, their interests would remain safeguarded.

= &nb= sp; In the backdrop of such politico-economic development in Indian politics, the = main thrust of the left movement should now be against capitalism. Indian capita= lism is now fully developed and has become a part & parcel of world capitali= sm, both of which in collusion or partnership are spreading their tentacles on = vast Indian market to exploit and to reap the harvest in maximum. They are the c= lass of people who enjoy globalisation. The force of capitalism is gradually becoming so powerful in India that most of the economic policies of the government at the centre are guid= ed and formulated to serve their interests. The rich are thus becoming richer = and obviously at the cost of the poor, who are becoming poorer. The grounds for class struggle are thus becoming wider and sharper, making it inevitable for the interest of socialist revolution. Obviously, the responsibility of the = left to give it a proper leadership is increasing enormously. But unfortunately,= the left movement, in its true form of united move, is yet to reach the desired stage. The leftism in India is on the crossroad, it must accept the challenge of the day.

= 10.2 Leftism and its dimensions : Netaji's pioneering move for Left-consolidation :

= &nb= sp; Immediately after resigning the Congress Presidentship in April 1939, Subhas Chandra Bo= se formed the Forward Bloc, with immediate three-fold task, viz., "Left consolidation, winning over the majority in the Congress and resumption of = the national struggle." A great revolutionary personality like Subhas Chan= dra didn't stop at this point, he had further plans to move ahead, first to att= ain independence and then to establish socialism in India.

= &nb= sp; He further explained his stand on left consolidation and its objective in his = own style of philosophical analysis : "Philosophically speaking, Right-consolidation is the 'thesis' which demands its 'anti-thesis' in Left-consolidation. Without this 'anti-thesis' and the conflict following in its wake, no further progress is possible. All those who believe in progress and desire it, should therefore actively assist in this task of Left-consolidation and should be prepared for the conflict resulting there from. For bringing about the Left-consolidation, the Forward Bloc was born = in May 1939, soon after a momentous session of the All India Congress Committe= e in Calcutta, at which I tendered my resignation of the office of President."['Forward = Bloc ----- its justification', Kabu= l, Feb-March 1941.]

= &nb= sp; Netaji wrote this aforesaid article, better known as 'Kabul Thesis', while he was staying in Kabul in disguise after his 'gr= eat escape' from India in January 1941. We may further quote from this document to explain his con= cept of 'Leftism' and 'Socialism'. Here he wrote : "In the present political phase of Indian life, Leftism means anti-imperialism. A genuine anti-imperialist is one who believes in undiluted independence (not Mahatma Gandhi's substance of independence) as the political objective and in un-compromising national struggle as the means for attaining it. After the attainment of political independence, Leftism will then be the reconstructi= on of national life on a Socialist basis."

= &nb= sp; Netaji similarly explained 'Leftism' in his famous speech at the Anti-compromise Conference held at Ramgarh on 19 March 1940. There he categorically stated ------ in the post-independence period " Leftism will be synonymous wi= th Socialism."

= &nb= sp; Interestin= gly, in his interview with the British Communist leader Rajani Palme Dutt, which= was published in the 'Daily Worker' paper in London on 24 January 1938, Subhas Chandra expressed similar views on anti-imperial= ist national movement and post-independence movement for socialism. Subhas Chan= dra said -------- "We in India want our national freedom and having won it, we want to move in the directi= on of Socialism."

= &nb= sp; Subhas Chandra not only preached for leftism and left-consolidation, he was the pioneer of left unity in Indian politics. He took the lead to form the 'Left Consolidation Committee' in June 1939, wherein joined all the then left for= ces of the country, viz. M.N.Ray's Radical Humanist Party, Congress Socialist Party, Nationalist Front or the then banned Communist Party, and the Forward Bloc. The leading peasant leader Swami Sahajananda Saraswati also joined th= is committee. Unfortunately the L.C.C. didn't last long for reasons which we s= till should probe deeply. Later in early 1941, the C.S.P. leader Jaiprakash Nara= in wrote a secret unsigned letter from Hazaribagh jail to Subhas, who was then= (in January 1941) house-intern. Jaiprakash revised his earlier thoughts and appealed to Subhas, in that purported letter, to once again take the lead to launch united struggle against British imperialism. But the time was too la= te, Subhas had by that time finalised his plan for 'great escape.'

= &nb= sp; It may be recalled that since then, there was no genuine left unity in the cou= ntry till 1946. The 'Quit India' movement of August 1942 was an exception, when, excepting the Communist Party of India, all the left parties, including the Socialists, Forward Bloc and R.S.P., along with the young and progressive elements of the National Congress joined this great National movement to fi= ght unitedly against the British Raj. Again during the post-'42 Movement period, when most of the left leaders were in detention, united left movement could= not be continued. Even during the post-war upsurge accelerated by the impact of Netaji and his INA, which gave rise to series of students and youth movemen= ts, country-wide people’s agitation on ‘Rashid Ali Day’ and street-battle against the army deployed by the government, the historic nav= el revolt, postal strike and the government employees’ strike, during the period from November 1945 to July 1946, the left forces could not emerge unitedly to give the last blow to the imperialist raj. If it could have been done, the history of India's freedom movement would have been different, the united Left could have defe= ated the right reactionaries' conspiracy and compromise with the British imperialism.

= &nb= sp; After 60 years' of independence, we urgently need another move for a broad-based genuine left unity.

= 10.3. Left Unity for stren= gthening Third Front/Peoples Alternative :

= &nb= sp; Even after passing away 60 years after independence, India could neither achieve socialism, nor could even take formidable measures for ameliorating the miseries of crores of downtrodden people. These are all for continuous pro-= rich policies and reign of the capitalist - raj headed by Congress or BJP. To ma= ke an end of this anti-people political polarisation, the Left must take the leadership --------- the essence of which must be a broad-based left unity.= A formidable Third Front, based on this left unity, must be built up, which c= an take up the challenge to bring in a pro-people New Order. This Third Front, which we like to reorganise as the People's Alternative, would be the vehic= le of change and would eventually lead us to Socialists India.

= 10.3.1<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:1'> Left parties in India --- a historical perspective

= &nb= sp; The left parties in Indi= a have had a distinctive role right from the day of freedom movement of our country. The working class movement mainly started gaining momentum under t= he leadership of the left parties, who could eventually sharpen the edge of the anti---imperialist pro-people movement along with the freedom struggle of t= he country. The left parties could achieve remarkable success in those areas or states where the left movement was closely associated with the freedom move= ment of the country. The most distinctive examples were the states of Bengal, Bi= har, Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Punjab, Andhra Pradesh, Tamilnadu, Kerala, and others where quite a few national level left leaders, like Subhas Chandra B= ose, Acharya Narendra Dev, Jaiprakash Narain, S A Dange, EMS Namboodripad, AK Gopalam, Sahajananda Saraswaty, Indulal Jangik and others came in the forfr= ont to lead the freedom movement. Even after attaining independence, the left Parties in those states continued to have wider public support base. As for example, we may look at the position held by the left parties like Forward = Bloc or the Communist Party of India. Forward Bloc had strong base in Bengal, Bi= har, Maharashtra, Punjab, Madhya Pradesh, Tamilnadu, etc. Simliarly, the undivided CPI was also strong in Bengal, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Bihar, Mani= pur, Kerala etc.

= By virtue of this leading position acquired during the pre-independence period, the left parties became the main opposition to the Congress immediately aft= er independence. But the left parties gradually lost their strongholds in many= of their earlier positions of eminence and have of late mainly concentrated in= a couple of states.

= &nb= sp; The reasons that may be attributed to the set—back of the left parties are summarized as follows :

= (i) Lack of overall left unity.

= (ii) Social causes of the people could not be taken up adequately by the left.

= (iii) Economic is= sues became more prevalent with the left and still now their agitations are main= ly centred around economic issues. But mass movements based on such economic issues could not be spread to all the states.

= (iv) Due to anti—people policies, when the congress vote—bank started erodi= ng, their share of votes could not be taken over by the left, rather those were transferred to the parties having their base on communalism, casteism and regionalism. Subhas Chandra Bose warned us against these social evils and divisive forces. But left parties failed to combat them adequately, barring= in a few states.

= (v) Left = could not project their equal concerns both for economic issues and social issues, and hence could not reach the hearts of many of the people who were yet to = be empowered by political and class consciousness. The non—left parties exploited the situation in various contexts and took advantage over the left parties.

= 10.3.2.= Whither the Left :

= &nb= sp; In view of the aforesaid reasons, the left forces are not in an overall domina= ting position in the present day politics of our country. They are, no doubt, st= ill scattered in different parts of the country, but in respect of electoral success, the= ir stronger holds are now concentrated mainly within the three states, viz. We= st Bengal, Kerala and Tripura. Electoral success in these three States may be considered as local success in three strong left pockets, but this can not = be termed as the country-wide left domination or a sufficiently strong force to form a left government at the Centre. Interestingly, by virtue of big representation from these three States, Left are now playing a decisive rol= e in national politics. But the Left can not be complacent with this limited strategic success. The UPA government at the centre, to whom the Left, as an anti-communalism political strategy, have extended their support from outsi= de on the basis of a Common Minimum Programme, is far from practising pro-peop= le policy. The ruling party's basic class character is pro-capitalist, while t= he left's fight is against capitalism. Here lies the crucial contradiction. Th= is contradiction and our political strategy had been thoroughly discussed in o= ur Madurai Council held in 2004. In the present context we are mainly concerned about the lack of left strength in major States of the country.<= /span>

= &nb= sp; We need not go back to long past to trace the left forces in different States.= The results of a few Assembly elections in recent past in the current year (200= 7) can indicate the Left position in the respective states. Assembly elections were held recently in Punjab, Uttarakhan= d and Manipur. There had been loss or gain for Congress or BJP in these States, b= ut the Left had faired very badly. Excepting holding a few traditional seats in Manipur (by CPI --- with support of Congress), none of the Left parties cou= ld secure any seat in these northern states. And in the Assembly election held next in the largest north Indian state UP, the Left had also miserably fail= ed to win any seat. The ruling Samajbadi Party in UP had been ousted from powe= r, making way for a basically Caste-based party like BSP. The other disturbing factor was this, that none of the four left parties presently having allian= ce at the Centre could come into an united front, not even having any electoral adjustment, at these recent Assembly elections. The consequent result was t= his, that the Left forces could not extend their area of influence in the vast Hindi-speaking area of the country. When the right-wing polarisation is in offing, we wonder whither the Left.

= 10.3.3.= &= nbsp; Counteract Left stagnation :

= &nb= sp; It needs deeper political probe to find out the possible reasons for the Left's apparent failure to extend its area of influence. One of the reasons must be our failure to organise mass movements in non-left areas or states, on issu= es relating to common people and their crying problems of livelihood. As we fa= il to involve the people there in movements on various socio-political and economic issues, we can not attract them towards leftism. Secondly, we have failed to rouse class consciousness among the millions of exploited poor pe= ople of those non-left areas, including the Hindi-belt. Thirdly, most of the politically conscious people belonging to the student and working class sec= tor and the left intellectuals are concentrated within the three left-dominated states, along with of course, the national capital. Obviously, their influe= nce go a long way to create significant impact on the political character of th= ose states only, keeping other states and areas out of their influence. No appreciable number of left cadres are available in these states. Fourthly, = even after 30 years of continuous left rule in West Bengal, it has failed to act= as a role model of leftism for the rest of the country and thus to attract the non-left states towards pro-people left ideologies. Initially, Left-ruled <= st1:place w:st=3D"on">West Bengal could draw attention not only of the wh= ole country, but also of the world people due to its unique success in areas of Land Reforms and implementation of Panchayati raj. Free from the curse of communalism and casteism, West Bengal be= came the seat of progressive thoughts and pro-people policy and programmes. Peop= le of the rest of the country looked upon this State with respect and admirati= on, which created lot of interest for Leftism. But when the same State started moving along the stream and submitted to the Reforms and Capitalist globalisation trend, although in the name of modernisation and development,= it lost its unique image of pro-people leftism and people started equating it = at par with other non-left states. In the process, impact of Leftism started withering away in the non-left states. There must be other reasons for loss= of left image, which we must probe more deeply and take remedial measures.

= 10.3.4<= span style=3D'mso-tab-count:2'> &= nbsp; Towards People's Alternative :

= &nb= sp; In the backdrop of such political scenario, it is high time for the Left parti= es to review their policy and outlook for the left unity. They must also reali= se that the responsibility lies on the Left to unite and rally all the democra= tic secular forces of the country to achieve a break-through in the 60 years' r= eign of Congress-BJP or other caste or regionalism-based parties. Leftism in its truest form can lead us towards the founding of the Socialist India. <= /o:p>

= &nb= sp; For achieving successful left unity, all the constituent left parties must have= the liberty to maintain their own ideological identity and to strengthen their = own party-development and mass movement programmes. They would unite together f= or a common goal with an united action programme. An overall left unity with stronger left constituents will be more effective and meaningful. This was = the guiding principle based on which Netaji Subhas called for Left Consolidatio= n in June 1939.

= &nb= sp; The other pertinent point and the guiding principle that we should keep in mind= is that, we must strive for Left unity on a wider base. It should be a broad b= ased unity of the Party left and the Social left. A narrow based unity of a coup= le of left parties (considering their representation in the Parliament) will be unhelpful and inadequate, particularly in view of its great task and responsibility. We can not discard many of the potential left forces simply= by branding them extremists or ultra-left. It needs to give up the narrow part= isan outlook. Politically it may not be difficult to build up a wider left front comprising various left socialist units, groups and individuals spread out = in different corners of the country and in various fields of the society. One = such wider-based left unity can build up and strengthen a true People's Alternat= ive which will lead us to Socialist India.

11. So= cialist India :

= 11.1. Imperialist aggressi= on headed by USA :

= &nb= sp; At the fag end of the Second World War, while leading his INA in India's final war of independence from out= side, Netaji keenly observed the international situation and made the political prediction that in post-war situation America would become the most dominating imperialist power of the world. He categorically said in his open letter to Gandhiji from abroad sometime in 1944 : ..."it will be United States of America, and not Britain, that will be top dog in future an= d it will mean that Britain= will become a protégé of the USA." Netaji's prediction was absolutely correct, the USA emerged as the top most imperialist power at the end of the War.=

= &nb= sp; Since then, the imperialist forces of the world along with their national counterparts are trying to re-colonize and thereby exploit more and more the developing and underdeveloped countries through nefarious designs. After the disintegration of Soviet Union and East European Socialist bloc and the vir= tual failure of NAM, the United States of America has embarked upon= a course of global strategy to keep USA’s permanent national interests all over the world and intervened into the internal affairs and sovereignty of many countries militarily or otherwise. The American imperia= lism is posing as a single super power of the world. It is acting as the global government as they have usurped right to interfere in the internal matters = of the sovereign states. The US administration is using military and economy as tools to intimidate the lea= st developed and developing countries. It has brutally destroyed Iraq and kill= ed thousands of people including children and women in Iraq, invaded Afghanist= an and Haiti in recent times, Vietnam, Kampuchea, Korea and Greece earlier and issuing threats against Iran, Syria, Cuba, North Korea, Libya and other countries who are not ready to follow the dictates of USA.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The US imperialism wields economic and military control everywhere. It has over 120 military bases around the globe. The American arguments for invasion and suppression are: 1) fighting against terrorism 2) dismantling Weapons of Ma= ss Destruction, 3) democratizing regimes and 4) home land security. All these = four arguments are farce and baseless. Increasing military danger is posing major threat to the peace and tranquility of the whole world. Hundreds of wars ha= ve taken place across the world after Second World War. The USA is = a party to all these wars in order to ensure its hegemony. The MNCs and TNCs are sponsoring wars to sell off their war-products to the third world countries= . It is also a fact that without a strong fist behind, no war can take place. Th= us America= is developing a war base economy.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The growing nexus of international capitalism and imperialism are destroying our entire economy gradually. In the name of New World Order the Capitalism has replaced democratic values of the society by market values posing that self governing competitive markets are the best guarantee of democracy by confus= ing the logic of capitalism and its working relation with safe in market. The neo-liberal policies that have become generalized during this period do not correspond to inevitable requirements for social development. They are rath= er policies of big business, in particular finance capital, that correspond to= its own interests and to the difficulties it faces in the present phase. They l= ead not to social progress, but to civilization retrogression which is characte= rised by the anti-labour, anti-people nature of neo-liberal policies, social regression, degradation of democracy, the drift towards cultural obscuranti= sm, an increased militarisation, imperialist interferences and aggressiveness arising from imperialism’s attempt to impose a ‘New World Order’ at the end of the last century. The US administration is squarely responsible for this state of affairs all over the world.

&= nbsp; 11.2. Socialism is the alternative to Capitalism :

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose had firm conviction that salvation of India, = as of the world, depended on Socialism.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The inherent crisis of capitalism is increasing. Heavy deficits of budgets, instabi= lity in share markets, galloping inflation, serious unemployment, general depres= sion in industrial production and degeneration of culture and moral values are visible signs of this crisis in almost all capitalist countries. The 13^th Party Congress of our party(Ra= nchi,1995) declared, “… the capitalist crisis is growing in sweep and acuteness. But it did not lea= d to the collapse of the system under the weight of the intensifying crisis not because that capitalism has attained the full capacity of riding the system= of inherent contradictions, but because of expanding technology revolution in almost all fields. This has a= gain been possible at the expense of the third world countries on the one hand a= nd further intensification of the domestic exploitation of the capitalist countries. It is true that capitalism has so long survived because of centralization of finance capita= l, regional trade blocks, upgradation of technology and modernization. Capitalism, no doubt, has acquired greater capacity to survive, but could not yet produce contradiction-free capitalism because it digs its own burial.= The capitalism cannot be made contradiction-free, and the class stru= ggle phenomenon will exist. The socialism is the alternative to capitalism”. But in order to overcome this cris= is the capitalist countries are trying to strengthen their economic control over developing countries more and more through mergers and acquisitions to form bigger conglomerates, by increasing surplus value in profits through massive attacks on the toiling masses. In addition to that, by an aggressive expansion of markets abroad, n= ew capitalism induces with greater controls over raw materials, human resource= s of cheap labour power and wealth as whole.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; While capitalist system was designed for use of all material resources, assets and funds for the benefit of a few monopolistic rich people, the socialist syst= em called for use of all material resources and means of production for the welfare of all people in terms of food, clothing, housing, education, healt= h, employment, old-age protection etc. Today the capitalist class the world ov= er is united and evolved itself into the capitalist imperialist complex encompassing the ruling classes in under-developed third world capitalist countries and the advanced western imperialist countries. This capitalist-imperialist complex formed the World Bank, IMF, WTO and other institutions to complement and strengthen the capitalist rule and to prevent socialist transformation all over the world.

<= /span>To counteract the crisis of capitalism during the 1980s, the then U.S. Treasury Secretary James Baker formulated a plan that contributed a new chapter in t= he history of neo-colonialism. The summary of the Baker Plan, known as the Structural Adjustment Programme, or the SAP, was linked with IMF and World Bank, having instructions on them that they would not sanction any loan to = the Third World Countries if they fail to conform to the terms laid by SAP. The= SAP came into force since 1985. The terms laid down by SAP included :

i) For the interest of liberalization in international trade and for promotion of competition in domestic industry and trade the borrower country must wipe o= ut all protectional measures in their economy.

ii) A broad liberalization= of Banking system of the borrower country is needed. Banks are to be denationalised and be given to private hands.

iii) All the public sector indust= rial units, financial institutions, commercial organisations are to be privatise= d.

iv) State is to keep a clear distance from social services (education, health, food and food grains), and the services are to be rendered upon private organisations, and these are t= o be managed with the principle of cost recovery.

v) All the present structures of public sector trade and industrial institutions are to be changed, retrenchment is to be made if necessary. The principle of cost recovery is to be strictly followed and tax structure must be changed. Small farmers, their agricultural produces and the rural units will come under the net of this tax structure.

<= /span>It became very clear, therefore, that the end game of SAP was triggered to col= lapse the Third World Economy, to make Third World countries absolutely dependent on the capitalist countries, to capture their domestic markets and to convert those countries into their colonies.

<= /span>India was forced by the IMF and the World Bank to accept and align with SAP in 19= 91 when Congress was in power at the Centre, with P.V.Narshima Rao as the Prime Minister and Manmohan Singh as the Finance Minister. The infamous Economic Reforms started there from, leading to the present state of economy which m= ade the rich ---- richer and the poor ------- poorer.

<= /span>Socialism is the only alternative to these exploited millions of poor people.

11.3. Planned economy for Socialistic Reconstruct= ion :

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; In his famous Presidential address at Haripura Congress (1938), Netaji had underlined the need for adequate planning for making the proper use of the country’s resources and deciding upon the priorities of economic development of the country. Forward Bloc firmly believes that development m= ust reach all the people and economic growth must be inclusive in its scope. Th= is is social justice and its denial will adversely affect the marginalized, the neglected, the deprived and the disadvantaged sections of the people. What Forward Bloc stands for is planned development within a democratic framework and increasing and diversifying the scope of public-private partnership and strengthening the cooperative sector wherever possible. Forward Bloc is opp= osed to the policy of unrestricted and indiscriminate FDI and demands well studi= ed fiscal and monetary policies formulated with the triple purpose of fighting corrup= tion and black money, creating employment opportunities and promoting economic growth with equity.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; We may recall how boldly Subhas Chandra put forward his plan of 'socialization= ' of all means of production and distribution, which should go a long way to bui= ld up Socialist India. We quote from his Haripura speech (1938) : 'The State, = on the advice of Planning Commission, will have to adopt a comprehensive scheme for gradually socializing our entire agricultural and industrial system in = the spheres of both production and distribution.'

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; For socialistic reconstruction, we need extra capital. We have no dogma in receiving foreign capital. As suggested by Subhas Chandra as early as in 19= 38, internal, as well as external loan, can be obtained. But these foreign investments and loans are acceptable in Ind= ia's own terms and only for India's own interests and necessities. Area of investment and type of industry can = be selected primarily on the basis of India's own need. China h= as systematically followed this principle. Generally Foreign investments are welcome for obtaining new technology and for employment generation, by satisfying these terms. Foreign investors will be free to repatriate their profits. Foreign capital, too, are in need of a vast market like India f= or investment.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Public-Private-Partnership (PPP) is also a substantial proposition that can be explored for national implementation. But PPP should always be regulated by State guidelines. In = fine industrialisation and investment should be encouraged, but public interest should never be abandoned.

&= nbsp; 11.4. Communalism and Cast= eism -------- hindrance to progress of Socialist India :

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; As Subhas Chandra fought against the imperialism-capitalism nexus and the feudalism as well, in view of particular Indian situation, he had also to f= ight relentlessly against the divisive forces like communalism and casteism. Abo= ut 75 years ago, Subhas Chandra categorically said in his speech at the London Conference in June 1933 ----- "Free India will not be a land of capitalists, landlords and castes. Free India will be a social and political democracy." [Presidential address at the Third Indian Politi= cal Conference, London<= /st1:place> : 10 June, 1933]

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; We have not yet been able to get rid of the social evil like casteism. Upliftm= ent of millions of so called lower caste people, exploited and oppressed for ag= es together, is still now a burning issue even after 60 years of independence.= We have not only failed to uplift them socially and economically, but regretta= bly the issue is now being exploited by some caste-based parties and leaders for their narrow electoral gains. For achieving Socialist India, we must resolve the issue with utmost sincerity and priority.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Equally harmful is the other sinister menace like communalism, which Netaji fought throughout his political struggle. He repeatedly warned his countrymen to be cautious against this motivatedly created social evil and even practically demonstrated through many of his action programmes how to approach and tack= le this issue. As for example, we may cite just two of his eventful programme = and achievement : one, his call for launching an united mass movement for remov= al of Holwell Monument (motivatedly erected by the Britishers, on a false allegation against the Nawab Siraj-ud-daulla, to foment anti-muslim hatred) from Calcutta in July 1940; secondly, Netaji's immortal work of raising Ind= ian National Army, wherein he completely eliminated religious discriminations in 1943. Netaji persistently emphasised that communalism was created, fomented= and nursed by the Britishers to divide the Indian people and thereby to weaken = the freedom struggle in the interest of sustaining their rule in India. Unfortunately, during Netaji's absence from India, India was ultimately divided on the basis of communalism.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Incidentally, we may recall Netaji's famous speech delivered at the Tokyo University in November 1944 : "You will find that outside, where there is no Brit= ish influence, there are no differences among the Indian people. In the Indian Independence movement in East Asia and i= n the Indian National Army there is no question of religion or caste or class. It= is just in India where the British have influence and control that you will find these differences."

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; While presenting the picture of future India, a Socialist India inde= ed, as he dreamt of, Netaji wrote ------ "In the matter of political and econ= omic rights there will be perfect equality among the whole population. When every individual has employment, food and education and has freedom in religions = and cultural matters there will be no more any minority problem in India.&= quot; ['The Indian Struggle', by Subhas Chandra Bose.]

&= nbsp; 11.4.1. Legacy of minority problem

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Unfortunately, we are still carrying the legacy of minority problem in India. = Although 'partition' was imposed on us on the basis of religion, India continues to be a secular state from= the day of Independence. Hence, there was no formal exchange of population and naturally, millions of Muslims continued to stay in India as the traditional citizen of the country. But unfortunately, the Muslim minorities, along with other minorities too, were not always treated at par with the other majority sections of the society. The Muslims constitute abo= ut 15 per cent of our population. But in many cases, equality and justice have= not been done to them. Consequently, a sense of deprivation, socially and economically, has accumulated among the Muslim minorities, which very often lead to many socio-political problems. A dismal picture of this deprivation= has recently been exposed in the Justice Sachar Committee report. Forward Bloc strongly demands that this decades-long deprivation of the Muslim minoritie= s, along with other minorities too, must be ended immediately. All sorts of reality-based suggestions and measures, as have been demanded by Forward Bl= oc in many of its minority conventions, must be immediately implemented so that equality and justice must prevail upon them.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; But at the same time, Forward Bloc looks upon this minority problem from an ove= rall socialistic stand point. We solemnly affirm, being inspired by Netaji's ideology, that minority development is essential for communal harmony which= is so urgently needed for Socialist India.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Incidentally, we may quote here from the AIFB resolution adopted at the 'All India Minori= ty Convention' held at Lucknow on 2 Septe= mber 2007 :

"Keeping aside the issue of minor= ity development, we can never achieve communal harmony. We couldn't achieve it = in the past, nor can we succeed to do it even now. But this communal harmony is one of the most important source of India's strength. In order to utilise this source of strength, we must devote ourselves for minority development ---- which is needed for the sake of humanity as well as for political reasons. Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose deeply realised this theory throughout his struggle-full life. Excepting Netaji, hardly a few leaders of national stature could realise this theory so deeply. For Netaji Subhas Chandra, this perception was not only a matter of self-realisation, he rath= er tried relentlessly to implement his faith and realisation into grass-root reality. All India Forward Bloc, being inspired by Netaji Subhas Chandra's = thoughts and ideas, is also firmly committed to implement the programme of overall Minority development for the sake of humanity as well as for political compulsions.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; "It's a matter of regret that the minority community in India, particularly the Musli= ms stand to suffer due to continuous deprivation on various accounts. Although about 15% of our population are Muslims, they are being deprived of many of= the proportionate dues in respect of various socio-economical and political facilities and opportunities. This deprivation not only leads to grievances, but also creates among them despair and a sense of being alienated. Consequently a sense of religion-based superiority complex among the majori= ties and a feeling of being alienated among the minorities create a line of barr= ier among them. In such a situation, the spirit of overall communal harmony is lost. It is, therefore, urgently needed to regenerate the situation and inculcate a sense of undivided Indian nationhood among the people. But so l= ong the socio-economic and political development of the Muslim minorities can n= ot be made effective and accelerated, this sense of undivided Indian nationhood can not be realised. From this standpoint we feel that it is urgently neede= d to identify the practical problems of the Muslim minorities and take pragmatic effective measures to solve them for achieving comprehensive development of= the Muslim minorities."

&= nbsp; 11.5. Socialist Revolution= : Present phase of revolution in India :

&= nbsp; 11.5.1. All India Forward Bloc affirms fa= ith in Socialist Revolution :

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The AIFB affirms that, it is necessary to replace the present capitalist state structure by a new state structure based on the alliance of the workers and peasants. There shall be elimination of dictatorship of bourgeoisie. This c= an be achieved only through revolution. The seizure of state power by the work= ers and peasants with the object of bringing about a new socialist order of soc= iety is what is precisely called the revolution. India, historically, is on the threshold of such revolution. Historically speaking, revolution is the orde= r of the day. Every popular struggle, although initially started on a modest economic demand shall have to be pursued towards the inter-linking of it wi= th other major political issues. The central object will be to convince the br= oad masses of the people of the necessity of ending the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie over the state.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The AIFB does not believe that socialism can be achieved in India t= hrough parliamentary methods. But it does not avoid election because it provides opportunities to project peoples grievances and to develop class consciousn= ess. By utilizing the existing bourgeoisie systems the activities of revolution can also be consolidated.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The AIFB assumes that the parliamentary democracy blunts revolutionary edges of= the people’s struggle and gives rise to corruption and other vices. But at present elections have become an important vehicle for expressing views and dissents and can even change the governments, despite many shortcomings, vacillations and limitations.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The AIFB believes in multi – party system. Pluralism shall be the hallmar= k of Indian Socialism.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The AIFB assumes that religion have no role in politics. The Party has an absolutely neutral and impartial attitude towards all religions and leaves = it to the choice of every individual to profess or follow a particular religio= us faith.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Incidentally, we may quote from the relevant document adopted at the Special Party Plenum= of All India Forward Bloc, held at Thiruvananthapuram in 1992. The document sa= ys :

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Socialism in India= cannot be an end product of any model of erstwhile revolution. She has her = own distinctive characteristics – historical, economic, political and cultural. Socialism in Indian context must logically bear the imprints of t= hose characteristic specifics and particularities. ... Revolution is the culmina= tion of ceaseless class struggles in the class-raven society. Indian society is = not above the dynamics of class struggle, which must consummate into a revoluti= on ------- Indian Revolution. It shall advance as the unfolding situation requires.

&= nbsp; 11.5.2. The success of a revolution depends very = much on the favourable objective conditions in the country. The subjective Indian conditions are different from other countries. The castes, the peasantry dominancy, the languages, the history and geography and the class interests= and characters are different in each country. Therefore each country should ado= pt its own form and method of socialism according to their conditions, Netaji envisaged.

&= nbsp; 11.5.3. It is imperative to analyze the present phase of Indian revolution. The National Democratic Revolution of CPI admits that the socialism is not the immediate objective of CPI. The People’s Democratic Revolution of CPI= (M) does not conceive the present phase of Indian revolution beyond democratic limits.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The National Bourgeoisie enjoyed the unrivalled control over the state for more than five decades and finally built up capitalism in alliance with imperial= ism and feudal landlords. The national bourgeoisie of India played the dual role du= ring the course of freedom movement and finally compromised with imperialism, wh= ich resulted in the transfer of power of the Indian state to the national bourgeoisie and in the partition of the country on the basis of an ill conceived Hindu-Muslim theory. The national bourgeoisie by virtue of their unrivalled hold= over the state after the transfer of power in 1947, has strengthened their class position immeasurably over the government during the last five and half dec= ades by compromising with bourgeoisie capitalist and imperialist forces and taken the country firmly along the path of capitalism leading to sharp polarizati= on of social forces in increasing proletarianisation of the working people and sharpeni= ng of class struggle.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Indian feudalism behaved differently from its tribes in western countries and even some Asian countries. Historically, the bourgeoisie fight against feudalism= in order to secure control over the state power.In India they cooperated with ea= ch other. Indian Capitalism was built on the basis of collaboration with imperialism. Dual character of the national bourgeoisie was also exhibited = by their efforts to secure aid from both socialist and imperialist blocs. Indi= an Capitalism is no longer weak or under developed capitalism. Alternative to = this is socialism, historically speaking. Capitalist society cannot be the ultim= ate end of human development. It is alterable and replaceable.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The ‘Socialist Revolution’ is the alternative. The unfulfilled task= s of democratic revolution, particularly, the complete liquidation of the feudal remnants, or vestiges of pro – capitalist society still existing along with the capitalist relations of production, summary expulsion of the imper= ialist hold over our economy, will be completed in the process of the growing temp= o of the socialist movement. There is no Chinese wall dividing the one from anot= her. The relationship of Democratic Revolution with Socialist Revolution was described by Lenin with= extra ordinary clarity that, “The first grows into the second. The second in passing solves the problem of the first. Struggle and struggle alone, decid= es how far the second succeeds in outgrowing the first”.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; The present bourgeoisie democratic state structure cannot usher in and build the socialist order of society. Therefore, the present bourgeoisie structure should be replaced= by a new form of state structure of the workers and peasants. This seizure by the workers and peasants to usher a socialist order is what is called Socialist Revolution.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; To clarify our idea about Socialism further, we quote from the Preamble of the AIFB Constitution : “The All India Forward Bloc, the party founded by Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, is a revolutionary party which accepts Scientif= ic Socialism as its objective. It believes in the theory of class struggle in = its fullest implications. It aims at the establishment of a Union of Socialist Republics in India leading to classless society through socialist revolution.”

&= nbsp; 11.5.4. Reiteration of salient features : =

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Salient features of Indian economy and prospects of socialist revolution in India may be summarised as follows :

&= nbsp; i) &= nbsp; Indian economy is now essentially capitalist economy.

&= nbsp; ii) Indian capitalism is now fully developed. It has now assumed the character of Fina= nce Capital. It is gradually extending its area of operation, with growing investments in foreign countries.

&= nbsp; iii) Indian capital is now not only investing abroad, it is also competing with foreign= capital.

&= nbsp; iv) Besid= es competition, it is, of course, very often collaborating with world capital.=

&= nbsp; v) = Indian capitalism has thus become a collaborator of world capitalism, along with aggressive imperialism.

&= nbsp; vi) Public sector in India could never contain private sector. It has rather created favourable condit= ion for unbridled growth of private sector, which in turn is also collaborating with imperialist agencies and world capital.

&= nbsp; vii) In such a situation, AIFB affirms that our fight is mainly against capitalism. This f= irst round opposition to capitalism, including both Indian capital and world capital, aided by world imperialist forces, would eventually lead us to Socialist revolution.

&= nbsp; viii) The present phase= of Indian revolution is essentially that of Socialist Revolution.

&= nbsp; ix) A broad based Left unity can be the vehicle of Socialist revolution.

&= nbsp; x) = A broad based unity of workers, small and marginal farmers, along with agricultural workers, and the exploited middle class intellectuals under the leadership of the Left can be the vanguard of socialist revolution leading = to a classless society.

&= nbsp; xi) Through this socialist revolution, the bourgeoisie state power can be seized by the working class people, who would bring about the change from the capitalist order to a new order of society, with new production relationship. The new Order that will emerge through this revolution will be based on Democracy. = But this democracy will not be the Bourgeoisie Democracy or the New Democracy or the People's Democratic democracy or the National Democracy. It will be the Socialist Democracy. Its guiding force and leadership will eventually help = us to build the Socialist India.

&= nbsp; 11.6. Netaji's concept of Socialism :

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; After his 'great escape' from India and while staying in disguise at Kabul, Netaji wrote his famous 'Kabul Thesis' under the title ---- 'Forward Bloc and its justification' in January-February 1941. There he outlined the eight point programme of his party Forward Bloc, wherein he categorically asserted that= his objective was to build ------- 'A thoroughly modern and socialist state'.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Netaji gradually developed his idea of Socialism right from the early days of his freedom struggle. In his Presidential address at the Youth Conference held = at Midnapore (Bengal) on 21 December 1929, = he said : "I want a society and a state which will not only remove all the needs of the Indian people but serve as a model to the world at large............. The new Society will have to be built on the basis of equality. The caste system will have to be blown away. The woman will have = to be freed from all shackles and endowed with rights and responsibilities equ= al to man. The inequalities of wealth will have to be swept away, and everyone irrespective of creed, caste or colour will have to be given equal opportunities for education and self-realisation."

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Subhas further said in a letter to Barin Ghosh in 1930 ------- "the principal= aim of our freedom struggle is to build a free and classless society".

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Netaji's concept of Socialism was thus gradually developed to give it a new turn hav= ing his unique characteristic and innovativeness of idea.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Subhas Chandra was so confident about India's innovativeness in launching a new social order that he proudly declared : " India has something new ------- something original ------- to give to the world a= nd the whole world is anxiously awaiting that gift. India freed means humanity saved." [ Presidential speech at the U.P. Naujawan Bharat Sabha Confer= ence held at Mathura on 26 May 1931.]

&= nbsp; 11.6.1. Socialism in Indian way, under Indian conditions :

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; While analysing the right wing and the left wing (communist) trends of thoughts prevalent in India during early 1930s, Subhas Chandra made a very significa= nt comment by saying that ------ "Between these two groups is another gro= up which stands for socialism ----- for full-blooded socialism ------ but which desires that India should evolve her own form of socialism as well as her o= wn methods. To this group I humbly claim to belong." [Presidential addres= s at the Calcutta session of the All India Trade Union Congress held on 4 July 1931.]

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; In the same speech Subhas Chandra further said ------- "I have no doubt i= n my own mind that the salvation of India, as of the world, depends on socialism. Indi= a should learn from and profit by the experience of other nations ------ but = India s= hould be able to evolve her own methods in keeping with her own needs and her own environment. In applying any theory to practice, you can never rule out geography or history. If you attempt it, you are bound to fail. India should, therefore, evolve her own = form of socialism. When the whole world is engaged in socialistic experiments, w= hy should we not do the same? It may be that the form of socialism which India will evolve will have something new and original about it which will be of benefit to the whole world."

&= nbsp; 11.6.2. Netaji's Philosophy of Socialism :

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; As a great thinker and an ardent student of Philosophy, Netaji was always used= to be guided by his own inner spirit, which was strongly based on his philosop= hy of life. From this philosophy of life emanated his own feeling and understanding of Socialism, to which he was devoted all through his life. T= his feeling and understanding of Socialism may be termed as his Philosophy of Socialism.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; Netaji expressed his philosophy of Socialism in many of his writings and speeches, particularly in his addresses to many Youth conferences held during the 193= 0s. Two such important Presidential addresses may be referred to which he deliv= ered at the conference of the All India Naujawan Bharat Sabha at Karachi on 5 Ap= ril 1931 and another at the U.P. Naujawan Bharat Sabha Conference held at Mathu= ra on 26 May 1931.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; While explaining his concept of Socialism, Netaji told that, our collective life = must always be based on certain principles. According to him, there are five such principles, viz. Justice, Equality, Freedom, Discipline and Love; these are essential to form the basis of our collective life. Netaji adequately expla= ined the significance of such principles in his aforesaid speeches at Karachi or Mathura. As for example, he said at Kar= achi (1931) :

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; 'There is hardly any necessity of arguing that all our affairs and relations shoul= d be guided by a sense of justice. In order to be just and impartial, we shall h= ave to treat all men as equal. In order to make men equal we shall have to make them free. Bondage within the socio-economic or political system---- robs m= en of their freedom and gives rise to inequalities of various kinds. Therefore= , in order to ensure Equality, we must get rid of bondage of every kind ----- social, economic and political ---- and we must become fully and wholly fre= e. But freedom does not mean indiscipline or license. Freedom does not imply t= he absence of law. It only means the substitution of our own law and our own discipline in a place of an externally imposed law and discipline. Discipli= ne imposed on us by ourselves is necessary not only when we have attained free= dom, but is more necessary when we are struggling to achieve freedom. Therefore, discipline, whether for the individual or for society, is necessary as a ba= sis of life. Lastly, all these fundamental principles viz., Justice, Equality, Freedom and Discipline ----- presuppose or imply another higher principle v= iz., love. Unless we are inspired by a feeling of love for humanity we can neith= er be just towards all, nor treat men as Equal, nor feel called upon to suffer= and sacrifice in the cause of freedom, nor enforce discipline of the right sort. These five principles, therefore, should in my opinion be the basis of our collective life. I shall go further and say that these principles constitute the essence of Socialism as I understand it, and the Socialism that I like = to see established in I= ndia.'

&= nbsp; 11.6.3. Netaji's Pilosophy of Socialism, his innovative ideas of Indian Socialism a= nd his guidelines for Socialistic Reconstruction of the country can only lead = us to build a Socialist India.

12. Ta= sk ahead : action programme for implementation of our objective=

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; AIFB's principal objective is to establish Socialism ------ Socialism in Indian wa= y, under Indian conditions, as advocated by our Party Founder President Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose.

&= nbsp; &nbs= p; For implementation of this ideological objective, we have four immediate task - oriented action programme :

&= nbsp; * &= nbsp; We must apprise the peasants how the Union Government's policy of allowing corporate entry into agriculture will adversely affect and seriously damage= the causes of the poor farmers and the agricultural system as a whole. We must intensify the struggle to thwart this pro-capitalist agricultural policy of= the government.

&= nbsp; * &= nbsp; In the name of offering long-term opportunities to the poor tribal people to e= njoy and safeguard their rights on water, land and forests, actually a conspirac= y is hatched to hand-over these rights to the corporate houses. We must make all= -out efforts to foil this anti-poor conspiracy.

&= nbsp; * &= nbsp; For generating employment, maintaining ecological balance and other vital purpo= ses, small and medium sector industries are very important. The government is mo= ving to dismantle the prevailing system of production of this sector and planning them to be taken over by the monopoly capitalists. We must resist this move= and unitedly fight against this policy.

&= nbsp; * &= nbsp; The government is not taking that desired course of industrialisation which cou= ld help generation of employment, economic development or the overall developm= ent of the whole society. Then the basic question arises, whether the industrialisation policy will be determined by the people, or by a handful = of vested interest industrial group and the government alone? We would like the development planning to be formulated by the people and for the people. The monopoly and big corporate houses are trying to manipulate and capture the = essential social areas of Education, Health etc. We must resist this anti-people cons= piracies. We must also fight relentlessly against those government policies which are being taken to facilitate and encourage the consumerism and decadent culture and the market economy. We shall have to mobilise aggressive opposition aga= inst these pro-rich and anti-people policies. We must fight relentlessly against corruption, criminalisation, communalism and divisiveness. This fight will eventually lead us to greater fight against capitalism.

*********************************