table yet durable - the paradox
The Painful Transition -Bourgeois Democracy in India Achin Vanaik Verso £9.95
Reviewed by Dave Palmer Achin Vanaik, the leading Times of India joumnalist, A Marxist and supporter of the Inquilabi Communist Sanghathan (Indian section of the Trotskyist Fourth International) has produced a major new study of the India's economy and politics.
Vanaik's work brings a theoretical originality and assured grasp to the understanding of the process of combined and uneven development on the sub-continent. This makes it essential reading for all those wishing to grasp the course of events in the most complex society on the planet.
With the weak goverment of VP Singh recently replaced by even feebler administration, Indian society and body politic to many observers appears riven by irresolvable tensions. How does a revolutionary build a Marxist framework for comprebending events in the world's largest, and poorest, bourgeois democracy?
Should we think of India as a dependent "third world" country dominated by an imperialist world order which blocks its development? view communalism as a clash of backward "pre-modem" identities, to be swept aside by the advance of capitalism social relations? conceptualise its rural social relations as largely "feudal"? view India as a "multi-national state" which could easily break up or be further partitioned? regard its electoral politics and parliamentary governance as a shaky facade verging of collapse? consider that the army may take over in a crisis or that a authoritarian Hindu chauvinist regime is a real pos sibility? see the hugely oppressed SOCIALIST OUTLOOK no 30. February 1991
REVIEW Indian masses ready to rise in revolutionary action if just given the right lead?
To these all questions both, theoretical and immediate (unfortunately including the last), can be given a definite no.
Vanaik's analysis sweeps away many common misconcep tions concerning India. It provides the observer of contemporary India with the theoretical spectacles to make the conjuncture of events explicable. His overview is intricate, many layered and highly innovative. This subject matter is complex and multi-faceted, and for most of the Wester left is unfortunately almost totally unfamiliar.
Vanaik argues Indian capitalism is both weak and backward yet neither dependent upon, nor (directly) dominated by imperialism.
He contends that, "There is no major capitalist country in the Third World which has a more powerful state than India's or an indigenous bourgeoisie with more autonomy from foreign capital" Imperialism or foreign capital (a
of Indian democracy tiny proportion of the economy) have meaningful place in the dominant class relations in India. The two dominant classes of the In- dian social forma- tion the are agrarian bour- geoisie developing capitalist farmer class which dominates rural social relations and politics - and the industrial bourgeoisie, predominately con- centrated in state industry and the long standing private monopolies. State sector Indian capitalism though weak, backward and inefficient has been able to embark upon the path of autarchic and bureaucrati- cally administered development due to the vast potential size of its intemal markets. The huge and predominant state sector (of the top 50 companies only 7 are private), state directed investment
funds and resources have been used as the main instruments nurturing industrial and commercial capital formation and growth. The agricultural bourgeoisie have been the main beneficiaries of the governmental system of agricultural subsidies and "floor pricing".
This dynamic of development based on the urban and rural elites - the "top 200 million" with the vast urban middle class providing the main market for consumer goods - however creates barriers to the growth of
Page 31
domestic demand and economic growth. The "alliance" between the rural and industrial bourgeoisies has become increasingly unstable as the rural bourgeoisie's influence has grown. With 70% of the population in the countryside, the rich farmer-led peasant voting bloc is continually used to contend with the industrial bourgeoisie in the "share out" of the resources allocated by the Indian state. This was the main cause of the breakup of the Congress monolith.
Authoritarian is that India is in transition from one variant of bourgeois democracy to another - more authoritarian -form. This is expressed in the apparent paradox that Indian politics are characterised by unceasing instability within highly durable framework. Yet the fracturing of Congress and its loss of political hegemony means it has also become incapable of a forming stable national govemment.
Vanaik argues that Indian's "national" bourgeoisie - its core component being its industrial bourgeoisie - has able to complete the tasks of the "bourgeois revolution" (agrarian reform, national independence, estabLishment of bourgeois democratic regime plus a high degree autonomous industrialisation) to a degree unaccounted for in the "standard" interpretation of Trotsky's Permanent Revolution thesis (Mandel, Lowy).
Vanaik's argument that the Trotskyist tradition should review its current thinking on Permanent Revolution and the degree to which the tasks of the bourgeois revolution can be completed clearly has major ramifications for revolutionary strategy in the less developed countries.
The high degree of political and economic autonomy of the Indian bourgeoisie meant, that unlike China and Vietnam, communism and nationalism never fused in India. This has particularly ruinous consequences for the strategies of the Indian Communist Parties both in relation to Page 32
REVIEW Vanaik's main thesis All leaders use communalism - with horrendous results the pre-independence Congress national movement and in the post-colonial Indian state.
Exterally Vanaik holds that the Indian state is becoming an ever more hegemonic power in the South Asian region and will derive increased global status from this role. It has the world's fourth largest army and has raised its military spending by 250% in the last decade. Both India and Pakistan are nuclear powers.
The very factors that make it possible for the Indian state to achieve regional eminence also make it difficult for it to achieve real global authority. South Asia has been of little strategic importance to the USA and Westem imperialism, hence the ability of India to sustain its non-alignment and regional pre-eminence.
"Nation-state"
Vanaik reviews Marxist theories of nationalism and their application in the Indian context. He argues India is not a multi-national state (like the USSR) but a "nation-state" which has largely "solved" the "national question". He argues no necessary opposition exists between India's many sub-national regional linguistic identities and a pan-Indian national identity. Most of the regional movements for autonomy (primarily language based) have not constituted national movements.
The most original and trenchant section of the book is that on the role of communalism, religion and their relationship to Indian bourgeoisie democracy. He con-
tends that "the most powerful candidates for nationhood in India have been religious, not linguistic communities." His approach is in sharp contrast to traditional (and again "stagist") Marxist notions of the advance of capitalism, bourgeois democracy and secularism modeled on the "European capitalist experience".
Hindu nationalism
In modern India any party can only win governmental power through appealing to a bloc of class, communal, regional and class identities. Though the "Hindustan" chauvinists of the BJ.P. may shift the political spectrum to the right, it is a restrained Hindu nationalism which is set to advance. Thus in India, the "spread of Hindu nationalist appeal and adoption of a modulated cultural nationalism by mainstream bourgeois parties are not incompatible with preservation of the broad structures of bourgeois democracy". The Indian state can be characterised as non-communal rather then secular. There is an urgent need for a new socialist definition of secularism and for the left to fight for secularisation of civil society. Southall or phone Oliver on 081 571 5019
Lastly on "agencies for change Vanaik pinpoints the primary obstacle to working class self-activity in the extreme fracturing and lack of autonomy of the Indian trade union movement. There are over 38,000 registered unions, and each political party has a trade union wing, while the state enmeshes the unions within a corporate structure of industrial relations legislation. Advance for the left can only arise through the linkage of urban/rural proletariat around a broad social agenda. Effort must be directed towards forging an alliance between of rural proletariat and poor farmers around such issues as higher wages, lower food prices and socialization of productive inputs and resources.
Finally some minor criticisms of this excellent work. The chapter on the Indian economy (unfortunately the first) contains many lists of indigestible statistics. Vanaik outlines the ideas of far too many thinkers, often for no apparent purpose, rather than sticking to the main models he wishes to consider.
Its a pity the cancerous role of caste - uniquely Indian, ancient and all pervasive - highlighted recently by the riots by upper caste students against the Mandal Commission recommendations, is not specifically addressed.
Lastly, he gives little clue as to the existing social and political vehicles for his clearly enumerated set of tasks for revolutionary transformation.
Of course none of the above detracts from Vanaik's study being essential reading. for any serious student of the politics of South Asian sub-continent. ACHIN VANIAIK will be touring Britain from the end of March to promote his book. Meetings n Scotland and London are already planned, and topefully others will be arranged. If you are interested in finding out about, or helping to orSOCIALIST OUTLOOK no 30. February 1991
With all this and more going on around us Socialist Outlook is making plans to go fortnightly in order to respond faster We believe that there is an audience for the ideas of revolutionary marxism within the growing anti-war movement, in the anti-poll tax movement, among socialist feminists, in the Labour Party, in the trade unions - indeed amongst all those fight- ing capitalism and trying to build an alternative to the new realist mis-leaders of the labour movement. With a fortnightly paper we hope to arm our readership with ideas and analysis that will be useful in the class struggle. But in order to do this we need money! As ever we must turn to you - our only resource - for the funds to start this am- bitious project. We are launching an appeal for £5,000 to purchase necessary equipment - computers, an ansaphone/fax machine and other essentials. Every issue of Socialist Outlook we will be printing a running total of contributions and telling you what we have been able to buy so far. Some groups of supporters have organised socials, others are producing anti-war badges, the important thing is to raise as much money as possible. The total so far is just over E800: there is still a long way Please make cheques or postal orders payable to Socialist Outlook and send to: Socialist Outlook, PO Box 1109, London N4 2UU. Even the smallest amount will help! We are relying on your generosity and support to make this venture a success.
PR: an act of faith?
Pete Willsman was right in suggesting that Davy Jones' article on PR required a response (Socialist Outlook No. 29). Unfortunately, his was not the one to be expected from readers of a "revolutionary marxist" joumal.
Jones' contention, "that PR would help the mobilisation of a real popular majority to win elections and introduce socialism", may well be an act of faith as Willsman argues, but not in the sense that he meant. For both are arguing from within a context of parliamentary reformism - quite legitemately in Willsman's case. However, Jones a supposed Trotskyist, cannot seriously claim such a description at the same time as suggesting a parliamentary road to socialism.
I am not necessarily suggesting that marxists should not give critical support to PR -we should give no blank cheques to the institutions of bourgeois democracy. However, the questions to be raised over PR include such problems as whether it would give workers and the oppressed greater control over their lives or whether it would help to break the hold of reformism. One can debate PR in this cort of context without any illusions that a change in the forms of capitalist democracy would allow a socialist transformation of society.
Perhaps one can look to Socialist Outlook's perspective of building the Socialist Movement with (amongst others) reformist
and with more clarity on the vital issues of the day.
to go! SOCIALIST OUTLOOK no 30. February 1991
LETTERS elements outside the Labour Party for an ex- planation of Jones' attitude to PR? Geoff Coleman Hull We welcome letters on any subject: but please keep them brief! Letters over 400 words will be cut. Send to Socialist Outlook, PO Box 1109, London N4 2UU For a fortnightly Socialist Outlook! ¿ US bungles attack on Kuwait creating a massive oil slick * 2 million strike against the war in Spain * Kinnock and Willis back imperialism to the hilt i Tories slip Poll Tax announcement through
SOCIALIST OUTLOOK Where were the Trots?
Phil Hearse's obituary of Louis Althusser (Socialist Outlook No.29) is a well balanced piece, and for Trotskyists I think that is a bit of a problem. However useful some aspects of Althusser's project may, or may not, have been, its core was an attempt to rejuvenate Stalinism in a more acceptable, because more academic and more abstract, mode.
Of course, as Hearse notes, Althusser did not actually engage with Trotskyism. Unlike Hearse however, I don't think Althusser's inability to see the 1986 version of Trotsky's philosophical writings was central to this. Rather surely it was the responsibility of the not inconsiderable number of Trotskyists organised in France during the peak of Althusser's influence?
Keith Flett
Tottenham
Page 33
Unshackle the Unions Fighting the Tory Anti-Union Laws The Struggles * The Strategies Speakers will include: *John Hendy QC, *Ronnie Me Donald (OILC), The 1990 Employment act is the latest in a long line of vicious anti-union laws. Its effects will be felt throughout the movement. Shop stewards and union officials at all levels are directly under threat. In order to defend jobs and pay they will find themselves in direct conflict with the law and legal restrictions on their union's ability to defend them. Come and hear from leading trade unionists and employment lawyers the details of the Act and how it links into previous There will be the opportunity to attend meetings with those from your own industry or union and workshops on the various aspects of the legislation, its effects and how to oppose it. A briefing pack provided by the lawyers will be sent out in advance to help the If your organisation is prepared to sponsor and/or make a financial contribution to this event please fill in this form and send it to We are prepared to sponsor this event on the issue of the Tory anti-union laws, their effects on the trade union, and how they Please send us a form for the registration of O delegates at 65 waged, £3 waged per delegate READ SOCIALIST OUTLOOK EVERY MONTH 1 years subscription (ten issues) for E10 inland, £15 Europe, E20 outside Europe (surface), £25 outside Europe (airmail) Multi reader institutions E20 inalnd, £35 overseas.
S THE OCIALIST MOVEMENT Trade Union Committee Hon. President: Tony Benn MP * The Law legislation. discussion. the address below. can be opposed. Name of organisation. Address of organisation We enclose a donation of f Send to Carolyn Sikorski 53a Geere Rd, London ES Name... Address. Subscription to start from Number
. towards the costs.
HALDANE SOCIETY = OF SOCIALIST LAWYERS Saturday April 27th 1991, 11am-530pm ULU, Malet Street, London' *Micky Fenn (sacked Tilbury docker)
----- pul