People's Democracy

KERALA is one state in the country, which had to suffer a lot as a result of the process of integration of economy with the international market place much before the advent of globalisation. In fact, for Kerala, globalisation started the moment the colonial raiders set foot on its soil, inaugurating the western conquest of India. Kerala’s agricultural products found its way to the European markets and, in course of time, domestic production had to be fine-tuned to the vagaries of international market place. Coconut, coir, cashew, spices etc which were and continue to be the mainstay of Kerala’s agriculture faced ups and downs consequent on the changes in demand and supply at the international level.

During that era of international integration, Kerala seldom faced competition for its products from foreign produce in the domestic market. For two reasons: one, during the period of colonial rule, most of the plantations and coir companies were owned by the English capital and, as such, it was against their interest to throw open the domestic market for these products. Secondly, when the country attained independence and started moving in the direction of import restrictions that also helped the domestic producers. It is for these two reasons that Kerala’s agrarian economy could survive despite its integration with the international market place.

However, those are the days of the past. With the LPG policies, (Liberalisation, Privatistion, Globalisation) all those cushions have been done away with. The removal of import restrictions has seen the market flooded with imported agrarian produce. It has literally crushed Kerala’s agriculture. The other policies of the central government, especially in areas like education, health, public distribution system, industrial policy, Centre-State relations etc also are claiming its toll everyday. Kerala is the best example of the impact of globalisation on the people as a whole. That is why A K G Centre for Research and Studies, Thiruvananthapuram, thought it fit to make an assessment of this process on the occasion of the third death anniversary of E M S.Namboodiripad.

For A K G Centre for Research and Studies the E M S Memorial Seminar has become an annul event since 1999. Academics and political leaders from different parts of the country converge at Thiruvananthapuram around March19, the anniversary date, to discuss national issues affecting the working masses of the country. This, the Centre considers, a fitting tribute to E M S, who devoted his entire life for the cause of the people through academic and political activism.

As mentioned earlier, this year’s seminar theme was "Globalisation and Kerala’s Resistance". Apart from the inaugural and valedictory sessions there were eight academic sessions on the following themes: 1.Policies of Globalisation and Kerala Economy; 2.Implications of policies of Globalisation and Kerala’s Resurgent Power Sector; 3. Import Policy of the Centre and Sustenance of Kerala’s Agriculture; 4.New Trends in Kerala Economy; 5.Interventions in Social Sectors; 6.Resistance to globalisation and Women; 7.Local Initiatives against Globalisation; and 8. Future of Kerala’s IT Sector. The notable academics from outside Kerala included Prabhat Patnaik, C P Chandrasekhar and Abhijit Sen. Prakash Karat, E Balanandan S Ramachandran Pillai and Brinda Karat were the notable political leaders leading the discussions in the different sessions. A paper by V S Achuthanandan also was circulated.

The papers by Prabhat Patnaik, C P Chandrasekhar and Abhijit Sen which analysed globalisation process in India from different angles formed the backdrop for the discussions. Prabhat, in his paper, "Globalisation and Counter Revolution", dealt in detail the history of bourgeois-led democratic revolution in the country and went on to analyse the counter-revolutionary endeavours of the present day Indian bourgeoisie. He emphasized the relation between this counter-revolution and imperialism and argued that the days of bourgeois nationalism are over. "Bourgeoisie’s only hope for growth and consolidation in societies like ours in today’s context lies in becoming a junior partner of metropolitan capital" he observed. However, "this phalanx of forces drawn up on the side of counter-revolution would not remain stable over time, as the promise of a bright future held out by the neo-liberal regimes come to nought. A small group among the petit-bourgeoisie, the salariat, and the intelligentia, would no doubt thrive under a neo-liberal regime, but for most of them the regime would bring increased harships. As the reality of such a regime unfolds, national resistance against it would increase, but this resistance can succeed only it is based on an alternative class-alliance of workers and peasants", he concluded.

C P Chandrasaekhar narrated the developments in the industrial sector, in his paper, "Neo-liberal Reform and India’s Industrial Performance during the 1990s". He made a detailed examination of the two phases of reforms, viz. during the 1980s and the 1990s, the process of restructuring the organization basis of industry, the impact of liberalisation on Balance of Payments, and the current stock market crisis. He observed: "the volatile and moderate industrial growth during the reform years appear to be accompanied by an increase in external vulnerability. The implications of this analysis should be clear. If Indian industy is to be placed on the path to recovery a combination of some degree of protection against displacement of imports and a faster pace of expansion of the home market is an absolute necessity".

Abhijit Sen dealt mainly with developments in the agricultural sector in the era of liberalisation. He established that, despite the tall claims of the proponents of the policy that the process is going to help rejuvenate Indian agriculture. However, experience inn the last decade has shown that the growth rate in agriculture, especially that of foodgrains, has come down drastically. The reasons for this are manifold. Compression of public expenditure, mainly public investment in irrigation, the deceleration in bank credit to agriculture etc can be cited as foremost reasons. And with the opening up of the agricultural market to foreign producers situation is going to become much more difficult in the coming days.

The different academic sessions analysed the different aspects of Kerala’s economy and social sectors in the above background. E Balanandan led the discussion on the power sector reforms and the session highlighted the grave dangers before the country. S Ramachandran Pillai was categorical that to overcome the agrarian crisis, Kerala has to follow a two-pronged strategy. On the one hand it has to fight the forces of globalisation. On the other, Kerala’s agriculture should become more competitive, by increasing its productivity.

In the session on "Interventions in Social Sectors" a host of questions were raised with regard to the policies especially on education and health. The gender question in the background of globalisation was discussed in detail in the session titled "Resistance to Globalisation and Women". The session on "Local Level Initiatives against Globalisation" mainly dealt with the People’s Plan Campaign and its impact. The conclusion of that sessions was that "There Is An Alternative, the People’s Alternative".

The seminar, in short, has become a major contribution to the ongoing national debate on the liberalisation, privatization and globalisation policies of the central government.