People's Mandate, CMP And The Left

 Sitaram Yechury

NOT surprisingly, many editorials and columnists are busy looking for the Left’s thumb impression on the Manmohan Singh government’s Common Minimum Programme (CMP).  The Indian Express editorially  talks of the “Invisible hand” (read Left) “guiding” (read arm-twisting) the government. In short,  their woe, echoing the  voices of crony capitalism, is that the Left has emerged as a force that cannot be ignored by the present government.

Let us face the facts clearly. The Left with 61 members in the Lok Sabha alongwith the Congress and its pre-poll allies together constitute a clear majority in the House. The promise of installing an alternative secular government at the centre cannot be fulfilled without the Left’s support. In return, far from “extracting its pound of flesh”, the Left, in a sober responsible manner, worked for a CMP that could reflect  the people’s mandate to the maximum extent possible.  

The RSS/BJP/NDA refusing to accept the people’s desire for a change from the policies that they pursued, continue to parrot an unreal interpretation of verdict 2004 saying that it is `fractured’!  Clearly, there were three dominant elements in the people’s desire for a change.  First, to secure the secular democratic character of the Indian Republic and undo the damage done by the Vajpayee government.   Secondly, to reorient the economic reforms to focus  primarily on improving people’s livelihood. Thirdly, to restore a degree of political morality in governance which was sharply and shamelessly eroded by the Vajpayee government.

The CMP reflects all these concerns.  While many agree with the first and the third factors, the  dispute centers around the content of the economic reforms.  In any economy, reforms continuously take place depending upon the  changing circumstances and new developments.  The moot question is not being pro or anti-reforms, but what is the content of these reforms?  During the past six years, the  Vajpayee government had distorted the reform process in such a manner that fostered crony capitalism.  Prize public assets were sold for a song, subsidies for the rich became the norm of the day. All these happened at the expense of the vast majority of the people as was reflected in the spate of starvation deaths and distress suicides.   The true meaning of the people’s mandate is to restore a  balance in the content of the economic reforms whose focus, primarily,  would be people’s welfare. Under capitalism, capitalist profit will definitely continue to be the dominant motivator of economic activity.  And, this necessarily  comes in contradiction with improving people’s welfare.  This, in fact, is the basic contradiction of capitalism.  Thus, we continue to intensify our class struggle for the  establishment of an exploitation-free  socialist society. However, when under capitalism, sleaze of crony capitalism at the expense of immiserisation of the vast mass of the people takes place, it is only natural that people revolt against the imposition of unprecedented economic burdens. This was an important element which reflected in the people’s mandate.

In accordance to the people’s verdict, the CMP seeks to restore a balance between  protecting  and improving people’s welfare and consequently changing the thrust of the economic reforms. It is this that the Left seeks to ensure.  To that extent, the Left will closely monitor the implementation of the CMP.  However, while the Left’s objective is to advance towards socialist society, the basic thrust of the IMF-led economic reforms is to strengthen the capitalist economy at the expense of the people.  This  basic contradiction continues to operate.  Given this, it is only natural that the Left, with full responsibility, should support the  present government in the interests of the country and the people  and prevent the attempts by the communal forces to stage a come back while protecting the interests of the overwhelming mass of our people.  It is this role that the CPI(M) and the Left seek to discharge in the present circumstances. It is the role of a `watch dog’ of the present government and not  its `lap dog’. 

Those who may see in this  a degree of potential instabilit0y for the present government will do well to recollect the track record of the Left’s outside support to governments in the past.  Right from the days of the Morarji Desai government in 1977, through the V P Singh government in 1989 to the Deve Gowda and I K Gujral governments in 1996 to 1998, the Left’s support continued to remain unstinted. These governments fell because others betrayed their own pledges of support. Thus, there can be no cause for any worry concerning the Left’s outside support, vis-à-vis the stability of this government.

Finally, it must be borne in mind that there is a great sense of relief amongst the Indian people that the communal forces have been removed from office.  This sense of relief is, in many ways, similar to the sense of relief the Indian people felt when they decisively rejected the authoritarian Emergency rule in  1977. On that occasion, the people rose to defend democracy as being non-negotiable for the construction of modern India.  On this occasion in 2004, the people rose in defence of secularism as being indispensable for modern India’s existence and advance.  The people have demonstrated their will and determination not to permit any tampering with the fundamental secular democratic character of the modern Indian Republic.  The CMP, to a large extent, reflects this overriding sentiment of the Indian people.