10 April, 2006

Maoist Legacy in West Bengal


Sometime back I had read an interesting article on the legacy of Maoists in West Bengal. It was written in 2004 by a lady from London School of Economics called Henrike Donner. Dr. Donner is a well known social anthroplogist and her article deals with the social influence of the maoists in the Post-Naxalbari period. It might be interesting to note that the Maoists have become increasingly popular in West Bengal since the early 2000s, and the influence of the newly formed CPI-Maoist party (formed by the merger of the erstwhile CPI(ML)-People's War and Maoist Communist Centre is gaining ground in the districts of West Midnapur, Birbhum, Bankura, Purulia and Bardhhaman (Burdwan).

Here's the article for the reader:

www.lse.ac.uk/collections/asiaResearchCentre/ pdf/LegacyOfMaoistsInWestBengalByHDonner.doc

(Note: Please copy & paste the above link in your browser window to read the document).

Being a sociologist, Ms. Donner has elaborated on the social context and not the political context of why Maoists are becoming resurgent once again. I would want to comment on the political context some other time. As of now if I were to summarize my immediate thoughts on the areas which Ms. Donner missed out or de-emphasized, these would be as follows :

(1) Indian society is still feudal in pockets--esp. in rural Bengal. Although some Marxist theorists agrue that the existence of landless wage agricultural labourers and marginal farmers mean that capitalism is prevalent, I feel feudalism has its remnants still deep rooted esp. in culture and the way of life of people in the villages of West Bengal. Let us appreciate the fact that feudalism is a complicated social concept--and just the ability of a few people to trade labour for wages, does not necessarily mean the feudalism has given way to capitalism completely. Rural bengal, according to my understanding is " pro-capital", where capitalism is trying to make an entry but feudalism still looms large. So ,if I were to "jargonize" it , I would say rural West Bengal is "semi-feudal" and "pro-capital".

(2) Capitalistic development in West Bengal has limited itself to the pockets of Kolkata-Hoogly industrial belt, Asansol-Durgapur region and the tea estates in North Bengal. The social relations of many other places esp in rural bengal have remain semi-feudal (or pro-capital) and the Maoist parties have better interpretation and analysis of these conditions than CPI or CPI(M). Their party programs are better suited to serve of the people of these conditions

(3) Globalization has have deep effects on the Bengali middle class--while it has created opportunities for one portion--a significant section has remained untouched or if I may , have been left behind.

(4) CPI(M) led Left Front has not completed the land reforms in West Bengal, as they proudly proclaim. While it is true that land was re-distributed, many owners of the newly gained small holdings have been forced to mortgage their lands to the erstwhile landlords for "working capital". So technically , while the small farmers are still the legal owners of their land, in all reality they are not so. They cannot decide--what to produce and how much to produce. Further, since the middlemen have not been removed from the agricultural supply chain of "farm produce to market" --the condition of farmers haven't improved much. It can be safely stated that the Land Reforms in West Bengal is a sham, at best partial.

(5) CPI(M) has followed a theory of "uniformity but mediocracy" particularly in the areas of education , health care and other public affairs. I don't know if there is any Marxist interpretation which suggests the extending social benefits mean drastically reducing the quality of benefits. So while the education and healthcare instituions have brought more people under their reach and have remained largely affordable--the quality of the services provided is far from being commendable. So, rural Bengal has not benefitted qualitatively (although quantitatively, more Bengalis have been brought into the job market) and urban Bengal has lost out. The trend in the late 1990s was an exodus of a large number of upper middle class students from Bengal to some south & west Indian states in search of employable educational qualification. This section of people in particular were becoming strong opponents of the Left Front. To arrest the trend, the CPI(M) led Left Front has 'opened up' the educational sector-- leaving it to the mercy of the private entrepenuers to exploit. So , surprisingly , a Marxist party misinterprets the problem and mismanages it. While it could have actively intervened to improve the quality of education and healthcare--it chose to let loose private capital to tackle the problem. Thus it has further isolated the 'have-nots' from the main stream & from the institutes of higher education.

(6) The problem of bureacratic red tape , official dom (called "babudom" in Indian socicontexts) coupled with a completely politicized police has further added to the problem. There has been emergence of a new "class" in West Bengal , which has used political clout as its only assest to gain prominence. This class aided by the unholy nexus of corrupt Party office bearers-Promters-Police and sarkari babus have created a new social division within West Bengal--the new "elite". While traditional Marxist texts do not recognize the existence of such a class--history has shown that such a social division had gained prominence under the CPSU in Soviet Union and also the CPC in China. I must comment abeit with great regret, that the state of Bengal has almost withered away- but only to the Party in power. Both have become quite synonymous. However, the state has not withered into communism by any means.

(7) Quite paradoxically, the left front rule has largely benefitted the petty & middle bourgeiosie
section in West Bengal. A significant portion of the middle bourgeioisie in Bengal are settlers from outside--namely the Marwaris and Gujratis. This class is largely national in interest and not quite comprador in nature, and the CPI(M) led ideology of "fending off imperialism" but giving dollops to the local bourgeiosie has benefitted them immensely. They had the party as their protector, and they survived the onslaught of the big corporations and foreign capital--and continued their anti-worker policies with ease. Most of these industrialists paid neither any attention to any technological or managerial improvement to meet modern-day market competition, not did they do anything to benefit the condition of the workers employed by them. The state run government organizations have long been managed by people with vested interests or party cronies who cared less about running these instituitions well and more about making individual and unethical profits. More importantly, many of these organizations were managed very poorly and intentionally made sick, so that the state government could wash their hands of it and sell it off to private management or liquidate it . This has significantly hurt the organized working class. So, the CPI(M) led party is steadily losing support of the working class--esp. the unionized ones to the more radical left and the Maoists.
However, it must be pointed out in this context, that the CPI(M) has retained significant support amongst the unorganized working class--it has been successful to create more opportunities in the small scale services sector--and has a steady following amongst the workers in this sector. It is this section of people in urban Bengal--providers of small scale services and utilities in the field of retail, transportation, household work etc who have remained the loyal supporters of CPI(M) till date. CPI(M) has managed to keep them protected from any significant competition from the organized big bourgeioisie. It has also managed to contain any significant real estate price escalation, kept the cost of living under control, and managed to contain any largescale civil unrest. This has endeared it to some sections of the petty bourgeoisie and proleteriat.

We'll get to analyse the political dimensions of the problem sometime later including the problems with the Maosists. Frankly I don't think that they have the potential to "organize" any revolution unless they undergo a significant shift in their political strategy and tactics and show better understanding of the Indian socio-political environment. Having said that, Maoists are well placed to create civil unrest ...esp. in rural Bengal with large support from the masses--but I doubt whether they have the capability, as of date, to steer it towards a revolution.

But till then, do enjoy Dr. Donner's article. I think it is very well written. Never before have I read such apt and unique anlaysis of the traits of Maoist movement in West Bengal and the perspectives she brought up have been quite refreshing for a change.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

This site is a member of WebRing.
To browse visit Here.

web page traffic counter