Kobad Ghandi Responds to Activists' Questions from West Bengal

Kobad Ghandi answers to the questions raised from different Left activists and individuals from West Bengal: 

Picture Courtesy: The Telegraph India

Q 1. You have written about taking a firm stand against Neoliberalization. I think you might recognize a certain type of social aspiration (regarding individual mobility) associated with neoliberal times. How these questions can be tackled by the communists according to you?

For example, I have a friend whose father had lost his job in a biscuit-factory (back then he was the sole earner of the family). Battling with severe poverty my friend completed his education from a government aided school, then took loan for pursuing B.Tech degree from a private engineering college, then completed his M.Tech from IIT by securing a scholarship. In the meantime his father managed to earn something by delivering gas cylinders to people. Now my friend is an employee (engineer) in a renowned international company. He knows that this is the only way to make his life a little better. However, I know a lot of such friends/people holding the same view. When the Tata project at Singur in West Bengal didn't take place there was a growing feeling for loss of future from this particular section of the society. And the feeling still prevails in the Bengali society very much as there came no new industry following this certain path. CPIM as well as BJP both appeal to these social aspirations by offering them the prospect of creating ample jobs (although that is not possible theoretically) in this direction and that seems really catchy. On the other hand the left forces that with proper reasons opposed such projects are failing to reach such social sections holding such aspirations and offer them any alternative during this period. Their quench for jobs can't be met with proper answers. So, my next question is, how to reach them with proper explanations during this period of massive unemployment by rejecting the model of neoliberalization?

Answer

The trouble is that India has not gone through an industrial revolution which would generate jobs. The neo-liberal model of development which is linked to foreign capital in fact prevents the industrialization of the country and generation of proper (not casual) jobs. The west had the industrial revolutions building on the colonial loot. China did it particularly in the post Deng period, built on the socialist base. Most of the third world cannot have the industrial revolution due to the massive drain of wealth by imperialist/ comprador capital. If there was a genuine industrial revolution by (national bourgeoisie) it would also generate jobs which would be released from agriculture. So in Singur and other places why the peasant opposes it is because if they lose their land they are not guaranteed proper employment. Today even MSMEs are under attack which are the major job generators, though of an inferior kind. It is the neo-liberal and now crony capitalist economic development which is being pushed by the governments which is even pushing MSMEs to the wall. So demonetization killed many, GST killed many more and now Covid/lockdown is finishing them off. In all this the big corporates and digital moguls the financial magnates have alone gained massively. But these people do not generate jobs significantly. 

Q 2. If we want to fight neoliberalism the question of neo colonialism comes to the fore. To fight imperialist aggression we have to develop a common front with patriotic force. Moreover the division among neo capitalist representing comprador capitalist and capitalist with nationalist fabric has to be taken into consideration as the entire capitalist class cannot be bracketed within the fold of comprador. What do you think? 

Answer

I would go even further and support Bajaj type models against the crony capitalists. Also may be Wipro, Mahindra, and maybe some other big corporates, even if as yet we are not sure whether they are national or comprador. While most MSMEs are national even some amongst the small bourgeoisie they are heavily tied up with foreign capital. The fact whether these are within the national framework or comprador needs to be studied further. But certainly Tata is not one of these lots (national) though his employment policy is a bit better. Also in all this the contractualisation of labour needs to be opposed. Contractors of the big bourgeoise should not be treated differently from the crony capitalists in private or public sector (NPAs of PSBs); they are part of the target. 

Q 3. How to address the question of environment and the question of technology in the framework of Marxian framework. In today's economy these questions have become extremely relevant. Environmental question remained neglected so long. The question of misuse of technology has not been taken into consideration. The movement against these has to be taken as integral part of class struggle as these menaces cause massive disaster for particularly poor.  What do you think?

Answer

Environment destruction is mainly the work of the Real estate and mining mafia, linked to politicians when the question of forests and water bodies are concerned; they must be thoroughly opposed as it destroys lives and livelihood. Also the chemicals hybrid/GT seeds pesticides etc are destroying our land and spreading cancer. These are mostly by imperialist companies. Also the pharma industry is creating havoc (but more about this when dealing with the covid crisis. They say 70% of our milk and much of the chicken have been injected with hormones and antibiotics. The list could go on and on. Yes it must be an important part of the agenda to rejuvenate our land, forests, water bodies, even air and food. 

Q 4. The industrial sector has undergone a structural transformation that denies the importance of physical labour. In IT sector it is service sector production. Is not the human force employed in this sector productive?

Answer

Have to give this more thought, but I would consider, I think, quite a big section of the IT employees as white collar labour. More than that I feel the contracualisation of labour has changed the character of the proletariat to quite an extent. This whole thing needs to be examined in more detail. I think RUPE  has done some study on it. Besides now the World Economic Forum is talking of the Great Reset and the 4th industrial revolutions. What they are foreseeing is a horrific future and the introduction of the Universal Basic Income to replace all subsidies is coming from the concepts put in the WEF Great Reset. Covid too is a tool for implementing the Great Reset wherein they see the destruction of most jobs and survival through govt doles ---- a UBI concept already being pushed. But I plan to do my next study on this and come to more thorough understanding. 

Q 5. Your idea of preparing oneself to be integrated with the life of the poor by way of simple living is related to the question of transforming oneself for the greater cause of revolution. This has to be practised not after revolution but even when we are in war in everyday life today. This is related to the call for cultural revolution. This is the subjective aspect of revolution that should not wait for objective transformation of material life. What do you think? This is related to your perception of Anuradha model. Is it not?

Answer

I hope to deal with this aspect in greater detail in future books. But this is not only linked with integration with the life of the poor, many do that and yet maintain their old set of values. It is also linked with a cultural transformation that has to be embedded into the nature of how we build the organisations and power structures. For example, what are the aspects we give importance to in deciding leadership and what aspects we give to the question of promotion in the organizational structures, etc. Internal change towards the ‘Anuradha model’ is a continuing process and must start from the day we start our activism. Why not just activists all human beings should strive to be better people and live happily without t all the tensions that engulf them. 

Q 6. How do you view the question of revolutionary authority? Is not there a sense of authoritarianism in this? It may develop centralism without democracy in party structure. The leaders are not subject to criticism as we faced in the party again and again. Loyalty comes so long we have faith on leadership, so long we agree to each other on the question of ideology and its application. Unconditional acceptance of authority denies the dialectical relation between leadership and cadres. What do you think?

Answer

Linked to the earlier answer I do feel the criteria of leadership need to encompass the values as a primary aspect. The authority must flow not from the organizational hierarchy but from the values and ability of the person. Anyone in authority can never be flawless and should always be modest and invite criticism. Yes the relationship of leader to cadre must be dialectical. And there should be an inbuilt mechanism for change if necessary. The once a leader always a leader concept needs to change. 

Q7. When the qualities such as straight-forwardness, simplicity, manipulativeness are spoken about -- there seems to be an overemphasis on the individual over the existent social conditions that mould a person. While they are highly desirable qualities but are they attainable in itself? Or is it that there also needs to be an equally appropriate reaction from outside forces?  How to actually go on about it?

Answer

I think these are qualities that one continuously strives for; it is not a fixed entity. If recognized all in the organization should be geared to acquire them to the extent possible. Nothing is ideal or absolute it is all relative. It is a continuous process of change. Often under different circumstances different qualities come to the fore. So, I may think I have simplicity, but in a particular situation arrogance may come to the fore. If organisations/parties keep these things on their agenda then it could be strived for by one and all. Often these are not taken seriously. Very often in an organization such subjective characteristics are used by one comrade to beat another. We have already seen that type of thing; that is why if all the three qualities are sought to be imbibed not just in the individual but also in the group/party then such methods can be minimized and themselves criticized by others. In the final analysis it is raising the level of consciousness not only in terms of ideology but also on these aspects. It is not an easy task as exactly the opposite values exist not only in the environment but also in our sub-conscious. Yet the effort has to be made. 

Q 8. Psychology is a very important subject as you have mentioned and one needs to incorporate it in having a more fuller understanding of society. In this regard, how to integrate the ideas of say, Freud with Marx?

Answer

In my future study and writings I will be studying more on psychology and based on these studies, particularly of the sub-conscious mind I hope to come out with a more concrete method to help change the individual. If we take the standard understanding that “social-being determines consciousness” there is no hope to change as “social-being” has all the negative values. One has to see this in context of not just ordinary society where it no doubt applies, but also in the context of change when we become aware of what we want to be. It was tried in the GPCR but failed in the final analysis; this experiment also has to be thoroughly studied. 

Q 9. What is your evaluation of the Maoist movement in India? Where is it standing? 

Answer

Judging from newspaper reports and a little information I received in jails it seems to have declined substantially from its peak levels around 2010. Maybe the farmers’ movement indicates a new awakening, but I don’t know enough. My point is we cannot just put that to repression which is the standard formula. Repression is to be expected when one says they want to change the system and goes about acting in that direction, for the retreat one has not only to look at external factors but also internal. 

Q 10. The Indian communist movement is divided into countless factions. And there is no global churning as it were in your student days. Despite democratic movements taking in our country there is no clear vision in the Communist camp. In such a background, borrowing the classic question- What is to be done?

Answer

If we get stuck in the debates of the 1980s like Manish’s critique and sectarian methodology, we will not be able to take even one step forward. All communist and socialist trends need to come on one platform (unity is not possible) with a single agenda of opposing the neo-liberal policies and its concurrent fascist policies. It needs a broad programme. In fact the farmers have shown the way on how to unite inspite of differences and govt intrigues. In this apologists of the fascists like the CPM need to be isolated from this platform while winning over any good elements within them. We have a past history on the role social democrats played in the rise of Hitler…..it I remember correctly. 

Q 11. You have stressed upon happiness as a socialist parameter with the economic egalitarianism as its chief component. Is there any existing model on inculcation of a value system in the party structure? If not, what in your view can help us achieve such ends?

Answer

At present I see no such model but in history we do as in Marx and Engels earlier writings and even in those of Mao. Why can we not learn from this history and take it forward. But most groups/parties do not even have it on their agenda and are merely stuck in the day-to-day needs of the movement adopting pragmatic and economist policies. If all the left parties that are part of this platform – parliamentary and non-parliamentary – one can get a beautiful culture amongst the cadres of love and cooperation compared to the hatred and divisiveness doing the rounds in the mainstream. But if we are involved in our petty bickering and small group mentality (each thinking they are purer than the other and resorting to one-upmanship as we see in MA’s note against my book) we will continue to foster ruling class culture with no attraction for the alternative. If the New Platform inculcates a new culture, not only agitation, but also poetry, theatre and even films with a humane touch, a new life will begin to flower. While opposing the neo-liberal policy we must restrict our attacks to foreign and crony capitalism and their hangers on, while supporting the Bajaj-type models and of course the MSMEs. It should stand firmly not only on the issue of secularism (without appeasement of the identity politics people like MIM) but also against casteism and patriarchy. It should seek to unite all democrats against these evils and scrupulously avoid identity politics however the short term benefit in elections. 

Q  12. You have also mentioned about the changes in the class structure in the present neoliberal phase. Do you think that the axis of revolution has shifted from the organised to unorganised sector?

What in your opinion is the way to address such changes in party policy and structure?

Answer

I don’t know about that but one of our major demands against the neo-liberal policies should be the total destruction of the contract system. Besides being highly biased against the workers it also divides and sub-divides them and keeps them from uniting as a proletarian force. This also has its cultural impact as the factory floor no longer becomes the arena for social interaction but once again our caste and community – residential area becomes the cultural centre which is now more and more caste/communal based. It defacto results in refudalisation of their ideology which is conducive to the rulers who use their narrow thinking to garner fascist support. More on this needs to be studied and its impact but it is a phenomena which has been aggressively pushed since the 1990s in both the public and private sectors, I saw it vividly in Jharkhand jails and from reports in society outside as well. As regarding jails: though a number of jails had been opened in the two decades since the formation of Jharkhand but just about 250 staff had been employed – the entire jails were being run by convicts and retired military personnel. Outside, I was told that whether it was NTPC/CLL or private sector mining or even the railways ----- every activity from labour to service was contracted out; and infact subcontracted out a number of times. This also results in the criminalization of the entire society where the bulk of the surplus is siphoned away in black and workers are paid a pittance. Of course this doesn’t affect GDP as the quantum of surplus is the same only its distribution is skewed – instead of a large part of it being spent by workers with permanent jobs, on the necessities of life, a major part is spent by the black economy generated by contractors, officials, politicians, police etc who share the loot and expend it on 5-star life styles. But in this type of economy the service sector grows not production and industry. And if at all products are purchased it will be elite goods, mostly imported. 

(The views expressed are the sole responsibility of the author.)