Yesterday was the day of martyrdom of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru. It is always a very big occasion to seek invigoration from positive social values whose great source it constitutes. It was also Dr. Lohiya’s jayanti. His followers call him ‘aadi vidrohi’ and others do not object to it. We need to reflect deeply in the context of the ongoing farmers’ movement.
यह ब्लॉग लोकविद्या जन आंदोलन की अवधारणा और निर्माण प्रक्रिया पर विचार करने के लिए और इसकी गतिविधियों को सामने लाने के लिए है। This blog is for discussion on the idea and strategy of Lokavidya Jan Andolan (Peoples' Knowledge Movement)and for talking about its activities.
Wednesday, March 24, 2021
Nyaya, Tyaga and Bhaichara
Friday, March 19, 2021
For The Alternative to Emerge : Lalit K Kaul
For The Alternative to Emerge
(Technology & Automation is the Challenge)
Lalit
K Kaul
To start with it may be useful to
state that self centeredness
and self interest are the basis for the contemporary societies driven by
materialism; the political leadership has been assiduously driving our society
towards achieving more and more material gains as that is the main index for
economic growth and when they talk about human resource development, it’s all
for the purpose of attaining higher and higher economic status. Human
development has become synonymous with economic development sans concerns for
deteriorating value system, ethics and the means adopted to achieve the desired
economic goals. To look for the much cherished ‘Human Angle’ in this jungle
shall be at the cost of being designated as retrograde. To compete is the
Mantra and those unable to do so are not worth their existence; never mind the
absence of level playing field. How well versed one is with the technology and
its usage decides the winner in the competition which is merciless; what to
talk of those who could never become part of this modern set up. Those left
behind- by design and not by choice- the pressure release valve has been the distribution
system of doles like, cheap food grains, cheap housing, cheap toilets etc that
not only is insulting to the very existence of this human specie the Creator
endowed with ever evolving Mind, but enslaves the very life and its dynamics to
the machinations of a privileged few. This is a Monster out to devour the very
life it did not create.
For the class of hapless people, there is no choice but to appreciate
whatever fell into their laps in the last 6 years as had not happened in the
preceding 69 years because everybody wants to live, no matter how and why. For
them, a Messiah has arrived and they intend to stand by Him as by doing so
material benefits are accrued; who can have any complaint against them? This,
in my opinion and understanding, is the ground reality and would continue to be
unless a viable alternative emerges.
For any new world view/philosophy of life & living to emerge the
greatest impediment as also the challenge is ‘Technology’ and its offspring ‘Automation’,
both set to increase productivity (enhanced profits) no matter if millions go
out of work and lose the opportunity to apply their minds to make their own
choices and bear its consequences. Again the pressure release valve is:
unemployment allowance; social security; national health scheme and public
distribution system. So the message to a vast majority of people across the
Globe is that ‘you are being taken care of to the extent that you may keep
breathing’ while We, the manipulators, having nearly completely exhausted the
resources of Mother Earth are, now, “exploring” Space to make Colonies in
Mars/Moon and/or any habitable planet in the “neighbourhood” of Earth. The
propaganda is so powerful that even the hapless is compelled to clap and admire
the spectacular “progress” the “Mankind” has made since World War II. These
hapless ones are so bewildered by the power of the Media & IT that they forget
their pain & miseries and stay convinced that yes, indeed, they deserve the
place they are in & continue to live in the fond hope that One Day their
siblings/ grand siblings/ great grand siblings shall make it to the members of
the ‘enlightened’ society which is in the process of conquering Space.
Those who look outwards; how to make them look inwards? In a situation
where an individual’s progress in life is determined by the fact whether he/she
could make it to a city life starting from the native village; make it to the
US or Europe, UK having got educated in professional institutions in India. Only
if technology is brought to the door steps of a village, migration to towns
& cities may start diminishing. In the neighbourhood of villages with the availability
of barren lands or by the process of acquiring agriculture lands (due
compensation as per the Act as amended by the SC), large scale investments can
pour in to raise capital intensive industries which will absorb the locals (with SSC certificate) for menial jobs &
those decorated with certificate courses with some artisan kind of jobs; who
would object? Who would object to availing a chance to go through the Gateway
leading to “world of learned people” in the hope that their generation next
will be able to climb up the ladder a few steps by availing the facilities like
schooling & health care as provided for by the multi-national enterprise?
The Corona pandemic & the exposed game of the CCP, the supply chains are
being shifted out of China to places like Vietnam South Korea and India. The
fact that many airports are being built in the state of UP is the pointer
towards the things to come. The technology is going to shape the destiny of the
people who hitherto were unconnected with the ‘modern world’. More than the employment
generation, it’s that distant hope that this infrastructure generates in the
minds of ‘not so well to do’ class that one day their siblings will also make
it to such ‘temples’ of knowledge & this may lead to parents spending more
on their children to get quality education. When Yogi and Modi call it Vikas in
Janhit; everybody not only nods in agreement, but also shower praises on the
duo for their commitment to development of their state.
For the leadership who continues to be inspired by the economic development
paradigm of those who colonized and tormented us for more than 200 years, what
processes can be thought of that may give birth to a leadership that decisively
challenges the extant one? Or, by what mechanism/ people’s participation can an
equilibrium point be reached between the usage of technology and empowerment of
people? How to evolve a dispensation which doesn’t allow Technology to enslave/marginalise
people to the point of them becoming irrelevant to the dynamics of the society
they are a part of? Can a set up be envisaged where ‘Man the Maker’ is supreme
& its progeny does not devour it?
Farmers’ Movement:
Sorry, but Rakesh Tikait has lost his way. Sure, he did not understand the political
import of his demand: “Repeal All Laws. No Negotiation”. He further ceased to
be a farmer leader when he started campaigning for & against a political
party. His panchayat with farmers in Bengal, I thought was a good step forward.
Media criticised him by belittling his effort, citing the numbers present in
the meeting; not impressed by 500! However, numbers never matter as it’s the
Idea/Thought that mobilises people. If he could communicate to Bengal farmers
the essence of his demand, then those present are bound to discuss with others
in their fraternity for the idea to grow further & gain acceptability
within a larger cross section of them. His idea to hold panchayats in different
states was, in my opinion, a very unique initiative, but his seeking votes for
a political party in Bengal may have exposed him to the charge of being anti
BJP and he unwittingly gave a huge handle to the media to expose him as a
political agent & not a farmer leader. Curtains closed.
I have always believed that the farmers alone have the capacity to redefine
politics, social relationships and economic model of growth, but again they too
look outwards instead of looking inwards. Al along during their
agitations/movements they have failed to present themselves as leaders of a
socio economic group and while earlier they used to be One with each other, in
gross terms, across the country on their demands; this time around that kind of
unity is found lacking as is borne by the fact that in the government appointed
committee under the directive of the SC had one of its members from Shetkari
Sangathana! Unless I missed out on the statements made by farmer leaders in
Karnataka, Tamilnadu, Gujarat, Rajasthan etc; I did not come across any such
statement(s) opposing the laws. In fact within UP, many farmers have spoken
against Tikait & even questioned his credentials as a farmer!
However, farmers across the country are part of the panchayats and as food
producers may be having a say in the affairs of the panchayats. I think that it
is through those panchayats that the farmers collectively can set up a
political agenda associated with the socioeconomic one, if only they can rise
above caste considerations and various other professional discriminations.
Likes of Tikait may end up serving a better cause than siding with one
political party or the other as all the parties are votaries of a highly exploitative
socio economic and political system.
Sunday, March 14, 2021
विद्या आश्रम के नये प्रकाशन
विद्या आश्रम से हाल ही में प्रकाशित पुस्तकें 'स्वराज परम्परायें' और 'लोकस्मृति' अब विद्या आश्रम वेब साईट पर भी उपलब्ध हैं. नीचे दिए लिंक्स पर इन पुस्तकों को पढ़ सकते हैं. विद्या आश्रम, सारनाथ, वाराणसी से इन्हें पोस्ट से भी मंगा सकते हैं.
स्वराज परम्परायें
https://vidyaashramnew.files.wordpress.com/2021/03/swaraj-paramprayen-book.pdf
लोकस्मृति
https://vidyaashramnew.files.wordpress.com/2021/03/loksmriti-book.pdf
Friday, March 5, 2021
India Lives in Villages - Sri M K Gandhi: Lalit K Kaul
India Lives in Villages – Sri M K Gandhi
Lalit K Kaul
Village is the basis (fundamental unit) of Swaraj. How possibly can a village be defined?
In the era prior to the advent of modern technology and associated advances in the means of
transportation and information sharing, leading to the ease of travel and ideas exchange; the people
living in different geographical locations mostly remained confined to it and its surroundings. The
natural outcome of this confinement was to be that the communities living in disconnected
geographical areas evolved on their own-may be differently from others- by way of interacting
within their commune as also with the surrounding Mother Nature. It may be said that because of
this intra community dynamics evolved a locally acceptable World View that defined a Value System
comprising Right Vs Wrong, Moral Vs Immoral and Ethical Vs Unethical. The social, economical and
political conduct came to be governed by the institutionalized Value System. This socio economic
political set up that bound people together may be called a Village. So, it may be said that there
existed village based civilization.
Travel or movement from one place to another was either by foot and/or bullock cart. So, the
accessibility to villages in other geographical areas may have been defined by the transit time. The
lesser the transit times the more the accessibility leading to interactions with different village based
civilizations. A totally decentralized set up with the possibilities of one merging into the other for
enabling access to wider spectrum of human and natural resources, willingly or otherwise. The ease
of accessibility to surrounding villages may have also contributed to inter village trade; cultural
exchanges and exchange of ideas insofar as relationship of this Human to the Mother Nature is
concerned. It can be expected that feasibility of such interactions may have facilitated evolution of
the Value System to accommodate different World Views thereby rendering it mutable. Evolution of
innumerable languages can be said to be a direct outcome of this decentralized set up as ordained
by the geography and constrained movement of people due to limitations of the means of transport.
Cultural diversity can be a direct outcome of this geographical separation which was not easy to
overcome.
So, it may be said that institutionalized Swaraj in the true sense of the word existed.
In the modern world/civilization it is said that the World is one Global Village and that the
revolutions in transport industry and information science has made it possible. The information
technology and transportation means have integrated the hitherto inaccessible areas at such a scale
that was incomprehensible, say, even 30 years ago or less. Owning a mobile phone may have no
relationship with the economic status of an individual because they are available to people of all
strata. With digitization of economy and ever diminishing dependence on paper currency, these
mobiles are being used by the smallest vendors to receive payments for the sale of their goods
including the payments they make for buying their inventory. Distance is no constraint; sitting in
Kashmir one can make payment to a distributer in Trivanthapuram through his/her mobile and
goods would be received in time. The reason why these small footpath vendors prefer digital
payment for their sale is that it secures them from any chance of losing their hard earned money by
accident or under duress.
The proliferation of mobile phones is quite matched by that of two wheelers; added to all this is the
network of highways and river ways that are being built to reduce commutation time. The whole
infrastructure is laid only to integrate each and every nook and corner of this land mass called India.
The underlying motives may be questionable / debatable; the economic policies can be questioned /
debated; the degeneration of political system and politics based on falsehoods & half truths can be
questioned / debated; there can be no two opinions on these issues. Alternative to present political
dispensation is the most urgently required as is the search for growth and development model that
affords each one to make a livelihood on the strength of his/her knowledge base so that this stigma
of ‘being poor’ and perpetuating existence on doles is done away with for a dignified existence that
allows an individual make his/her own choices in his/her personal world.
But, in today’s world,
How do we define a village?
In today’s world the basis for Swaraj need not be a Village, in the traditional sense; but a democratic
set up that allows direct and not indirect way of electing people’s representatives. So, the question
may be framed as: What can be the fundamental unit that enables people to choose / elect their
representatives directly to various Assemblies and the Parliament? The contemporary system of
elections deprives people of that fundamental right.
In my opinion, whatever be the limitations of Rakesh Tikait & the attempts of other vested interests
to hijack his platform; basically he is questioning the Parliamentary Democracy; MSP etc are not the
issues as the government has shown willingness to accommodate the farmers’ demands including
putting a hold on the new laws for 1 ½ to 2 years. He is not budging as he wants laws to be repealed
& that’s the political message. January 26 flag hoisting hijacked his agenda & farmers started
distancing themselves from him. His fallibility lies in the kind of threatening language he uses. Yet
the message is loud & clear that has rattled the government. Slapping of charges against him
including imprisonment may not annihilate the political seed that he has sown. If it sinks in the
minds of well meaning people, his demand may usher in an era of new politics.
Sunday, February 28, 2021
Swaraj Dialogue -3
Farmers’ Movement : Is Sovereignty at Issue ?
What
is the destiny of the farmers’ movement? Let us divide this question into two
parts : one, whether their demands as they are of repeal of the three farm laws
and a law on MSP are going to be met? and two, what could be the pointers for
societal future emerging from a farmers movement so large as this?
The
entire media and the world of activists is discussing the first question and I
have no special or further insight to add to that discussion. I wish to focus
on the second question, which, we shall see through this piece, also has a
bearing on the first question.
Through
the 1970s, 80s and 90s farmers of this country had been in great movement. The
big names associated with that movement were Narayana Swami Naidu from Tamil
Nadu, Nanjunda Swami from Karnataka, Sharad Joshi from Maharashtra, Mahendra
Singh Tikait from Uttar Pradesh, Mangeram
Malik from Haryana, Balbir Singh Rajewaal, Ajmer Singh Lakhowal and Bhupinder
Singh Maan from Punjab. Leadership of this farmers’ movement was in farmers’ hands.
The primary understanding was that the causes of poverty of the farmers lay
outside the villages. The chief issue was just and remunerative price for
agricultural produce. Major other issues were debt relief and electricity tariff.
The farmers’ leadership was rather clear that although expressed in terms of wellbeing
of the farmer, their demands, position and understanding of the world were
directly in the interest of the whole society. It was argued that ‘just’ prices
is the path of eradicating poverty from the root and enabling society at all
levels and in all regions towards higher and higher levels of economic
activity. They had argued that ‘just’ price for agricultural produce would lead
to much greater economic activity in the local bazar and to improvement
of wages of the workers. There was an imagination of entering the 21st
century on farmers’ terms. This simply meant that the farmers saw themselves as
assuming the leadership of the society to build the world afresh- regulations
from below, from the villages, to produce a distributed economy. This was in
tune with the idea of local self governance or swaraj.
The practice
of the present farmers’ movement has all these indicators. The rejection of the
three laws is not just for preservation of autonomy but the claim of
sovereignty may be seen not far below the surface. Is there a new idea of
sovereignty involved here? It is this that gives the feeling that a new
political idea is in the making. So far all politics has been subservient in
thought as well as in practice to the stream of ideas and practices that were
born about 500 years ago in Europe.
Through
this period the world saw the emergence of colonialism, imperialism, big
industry and large markets. The shine and wealth that we see in the large
cities is sourced from the village, from the farmer’s activity. Through this
period also emerged the thought that farmers in this process will cease to
remain as a social class. Perhaps it was only a wishful thinking that those who
were looted would not remain organisable at all, having ceased to be a social
class. Gandhi belied these theories and
sourced his strengths from the villages of India. Then the matter got focused
again in the last decades of 20th century with the nationwide rise
of the farmers’ movement, which largely called itself non-political and was
particularly intend in the state of TamilNadu, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Uttar
Pradesh, Hariyana and Punjab. Chaudhary Charan Singh though part of the
political establishment, coined the term ‘Kisan Satta’ on the occasion
of almost a million strong kisan-sammela, in the Boat Club in New
Delhi in 1978.
It was around 1780 that
this country saw, with Permanent Settlement, the beginning of the slavery of
peasants. 200 years of struggle against zamindaars, the British and governments
of independent India by the peasantry seem to have finally entered a phase
where the farmers are up to contending for sovereignty. If we go by Mahatma Gandhi’s
understanding of pre-British India the peasant and the village was a sovereign
entity then. The present farmers’ movement seems to lay the basis for a claim to
sovereignty again. Any such claim
naturally must be associated with movement towards a different political order,
best described by ‘swaraj’. Sovereignty in swaraj is distributed both
vertically and horizontally. The contestation between the Kisan
Mahapanchayat and the Parliament both in the realm of power and leadership
of society seems to be carving that space where direct participatory democracy
and representative democracy fuse to produce qualitatively different methods of
decision making and governance, ideas about which may possibly be also
unearthed if people of India excavate deeper into their memories, into lokasmruti.
A debate must start in all
earnestness among all the concerned on what it means to see a peasant household
as a sovereign.
Sunil Sahasrabudhey
28 Feb 2021, Vidya Ashram, Sarnath
किसान आन्दोलन : सवाल है मालिक कौन?
किसान आन्दोलन किधर चला? इस सवाल के दो हिस्से हैं. पहला यह
कि क्या हाल में बनाये गए तीन कृषि कानून वापस होंगे और न्यूनतम समर्थन मूल्य को
वैधानिक दर्जा मिलेगा? दूसरा यह कि पूरे समाज का रूप लिए यह विशाल किसान आन्दोलन
समाज के भविष्य के बारे में क्या कह रहा है ?
मीडिया और सामाजिक कार्यकर्त्ता सब पहले प्रश्न के
इर्द-गिर्द बहस कर रहे हैं तथापि उसमें हमें कोई नई बात नहीं कहनी है. इस पोस्ट
में हम दूसरे प्रश्न पर ध्यान केन्द्रित करेंगे तथा यह बातचीत पहले प्रश्न के लिए
भी प्रासंगिक होगी ही.
1970, 1980 और 1990
के दशकों में इस देश में किसानों का एक देशव्यापी विशाल आन्दोलन हुआ जिसकी धार विशेषतौर
पर तमिलनाडु, कर्णाटक, महाराष्ट्र, उत्तर प्रदेश, हरियाणा और पंजाब में बड़ी तेज़
रही. इस आन्दोलन के साथ जुड़े बड़े नाम हैं- तमिलनाडु के नारायण स्वामी नायडू,
कर्नाटक के नन्जुन्द स्वामी, महाराष्ट्र के शरद जोशी, उत्तर प्रदेश के महेंद्र
सिंह टिकैत, हरियाणा के मांगेराम मालिक और पंजाब के बलबीर सिंह राजेवाल, अजमेर
सिंह लखोवाल, भूपिंदर सिंह मान. हम लोगों ने मज़दूर किसान नीति पत्रिका के मार्फ़त इस
आन्दोलन में समन्वय की भूमिका निभाई और इस आन्दोलन के सन्देश को मध्य वर्ग के
लोगों तक पहुँचाया. आन्दोलन का नेतृत्व किसानों के ही हाथ में था. मूल समझ यह रही
कि किसानों की गरीबी के कारण गाँव के बाहर हैं. मुख्य मुद्दा रहा- कृषि उत्पाद के
लिए न्यायसंगत लाभकारी मूल्य, क़र्ज़ मुक्ति और बिजली का दाम भी बड़े मुद्दे रहे.
नेतृत्व को यह साफ़ था कि हालाँकि प्रमुख बात किसानों की माली हालत से जुडी रही,
उनकी मांगें, उनका दृष्टिकोण और दुनिया की उनकी समझ, सीधे पूरे समाज के हित में
रहे. बड़ी सफाई से तर्क पेश किये गए कि किस तरह कृषि उत्पाद के लिए न्याय सांगत
मूल्य मिलना गरीबी को जड़ से ख़त्म करने का पक्का रास्ता बनता है. क्योंकि इसके चलते
हर स्तरपर और हर क्षेत्र में आर्थिक गतिविधियों में इजाफा होता है. साफ़ तौर पर यह
कहा गया कि कृषि उत्पाद को ढंग का दाम मिलने से स्थानीय बाज़ार में एक चमक और गति
दिखाई देती है और कामगारों के श्रम के मूल्य में वृद्धि के रास्ते खुलते हैं. बड़ी
कल्पना देश को किसानों के नज़रिए से इक्कीसवीं सदी में प्रवेश करने की रही. सरल
शब्दों में यह कि किसानों ने पूरे समाज का नेतृत्व अपने हाथ में लेकर दुनिया को नए
सिरे से बनाने के ख़्वाब देखे, ऐसी दुनिया जिसमें नियमन नीचे से हो, गाँव से हो और
एक वितरित अर्थ व्यवस्था का निर्माण हो. यह बात स्थानीय प्रशासन अथवा स्वराज के
विचार से बहुत मेल खाती है.
वर्तमान किसान आन्दोलन में ये सब संकेत मिलते हैं. उत्पादन,
वितरण और भण्डारण से सम्बंधित तीन नए कृषि कानूनों को सिरे से ख़ारिज कर देने के
आधार में स्वायत्तता का आग्रह तो है ही तथापि संप्रभुता का विचार भी नज़र आता है.
क्या यहाँ पर संप्रभुता का कोई नया विचार आकार ले रहा हो सकता है? यह सोचकर लगता
है की इस प्रक्रिया में राजनीति का एक नया विचार जन्म ले रहा है.
अब तक विचार और कर्म दोनों में ही सारी राजनीति यूरोपीय
विचारों और शासन क्रियाओं से सीख लेकर ही होती रही हैं. करीब पांच सौ साल पहले
यूरोप में जो क्रियाये और विचार शुरू हुए उन्होंने ही आगे चलाकर उपनिवेशवाद,
साम्राज्यवाद, बड़े उद्योग, और बड़े-बड़े बाजारों का रूप लिया. जो चमक और सम्पदा बड़े
शहरों में दिखाई देती है उसका स्रोत गाँव में है, किसान की गतिविधि में है. इसी
दौर में यह विचार भी सामने आया कि इन प्रक्रियाओं में किसान का एक सामाजिक वर्ग के
रूप में अस्तित्व ही समाप्त हो जायेगा. शायद यह केवल मनमाफिक सोच ही रही कि जिसको लूटा
गया है वह संगठित रह ही न जाए यानि उसका सामाजिक अस्तित्व ही समाप्त हो जाये.
गांधी ने अपनी ताकत का स्रोत गांवों को बनाया और इन वैचारिक स्थापनाओं को झुठला दिया.
फिर 20वीं सदी के अंतिम दशकों में किसानों को एक नये आन्दोलन ने इस ताकत का फिर से
एहसास कराया. यह आन्दोलन अधिकतर अपने को अराजनीतिक कहता रहा. तथापि राजनीति के
अन्दर से ही चौधरी चरणसिंह ने 1978 में नई दिल्ली के बोट क्लब में लाखों किसानों
के सम्मलेन के मौके पर ‘किसान सत्ता’ का विचार दिया.
1780 के आस-पास इस देश में अंग्रेजों ने ज़मींदारी की
व्यवस्था लागू की जिससे किसानों की गुलामी का युग शुरू हुआ. ज़मींदारों, अँगरेज़
शासकों और स्वतंत्र भारत के हुक्मरानों के सामने अपना एतराज़ और विरोध दर्ज करते
हुए दो सौ साल के किसानों के संघर्ष अब उस मुक्काम पर पहुंचे हैं, जहाँ वे अपनी संप्रभुता
का दावा पेश कर रहे हों, कह रहे हों कि मालिक वे हैं.
महात्मा गाँधी की समझ में अंग्रेजी राज के पहले भारत में किसान
और गाँव मालिक हुआ करते थे. किसान आन्दोलन एक बार फिर उनके मालिक होने का दावा पेश
करने का आधार बनाता मालूम पड़ रहा है. ऐसे दावे के साथ जाहिर तौर पर वह गति भी
दिखाई देनी चाहिए जो एक अलग राज और शासन व्यवस्था की और ले जाए, जिसे स्वराज कहा
जा सके. स्वराज में संप्रभुता (सभी आयामों में) वितरित होती है. सत्ता और सामाजिक
नेतृत्व दोनों ही आयामों में संसद और किसान महापंचायत के बीच प्रतिस्पर्धी दावे
दिखाई दे रहे हैं. जिनके चलते उस स्थान का निर्माण हो रहा है, जहाँ सीधी भागीदारी
का लोकतंत्र और प्रतिनिधि लोकतंत्र के आपसी संस्लेषण से सर्वथा नये किस्म की निर्णय
के तरीके और शासन के प्रकार आकार ले सकते हैं. इस सृजन में बड़ा योगदान हो सकता है
यदि भारत के लोगों की यादों, लोकस्मृति की गहराइयों में उतरा जाये.
पूरी गंभीरता के साथ इस विषय से सरोकार रखने वालों को आपस
में बात करनी चाहिए कि किसान परिवार की संप्रभुता का क्या अर्थ निकलता है?
सुनील सहस्रबुद्धे
28 फरवरी 2021, विद्या आश्रम, सारनाथ
Friday, February 19, 2021
Swaraj Dialogue – 2
Farmers Movement : Is
there a Knowledge Conflict?
The conflict between
the Government and the Farmers’ Movement does not appear to be heading towards
a solution. On one side is the government (majority in the Parliament) and on
the other is the farmers’ understanding of the three laws finding expression in
the statements of Samyukt Kisan Morcha and the Mahapanchayts.
The government is talking
about the advantage/profit to the farmers and the farmer is talking about ‘justice’.
The world of knowledge, with which the parliament and the political processes
their off are connected, is tied to the logic of ‘profit and loss’. This world
of knowledge was born some 4-5 hundred years ago in Europe in a process in
which were also born the new cities, trade and market which pushed the village
and the farmer to the secondary position. Those who lived in the new cities
became the citizens. Over time this process gave birth to parliamentary democracy.
Morality, justice, and sacrifice have no place in this world of knowledge . It
is this knowledge that is the ideal of the universities today. On the other
hand, the worlds of knowledge to which the farmers belong have different
traditions. We can call them swadeshi traditions of knowledge’ where justice,
sacrifice and peoples’ agree-ability (lokasammat) are present intrinsically.
It appears that the stalemate,
in the ultimate analysis, stems from the deep differences between these two
worlds of knowledge. It is not easy to find a way in such an impasse. The
government commands greater physical force and may find a solution based on
such force. However, it will not be respectable and both sides would be hurt
albeit in different ways. Anyway, the solution to be found will be determined
by the leaderships of the two sides. They may be able to find a respectable
solution, but one thing is certain that ways will have to be found to move
towards a new arrangement of things and men/women, which incorporates the
values of both, the Panchayat and the Parliamentary Democracy.
Broadly speaking the
whole society ought to be part of this search for the new arrangement, the
systems of governance and conflict resolution. It will require fraternal
relationship between various ways of thinking and streams of knowledge in
society. Specifically, what is needed is a friendly relation between the
knowledge in the university and the knowledge in society, namely lokavidya.
Each will have to recognize and respect the interdependent, autonomous and sovereign
nature of the other. This sub-continent is not unaware of such governance and
social regulation. Traditions of swaraj is where we need to look to.
Sunil Sahasrabudhey
19 February 2021
Vidya Ashram, Sarnath
स्वराज संवाद – 2
किसान आन्दोलन और सरकार के बीच की जिच कुछ हल होने का
नाम नहीं ले रही है. एक ओर सरकार (संसद में बहुमत) का निर्णय है और दूसरी ओर
किसानों की समझ जिसकी झलक संयुक्त किसान मोर्चे के वक्तव्यों और महापंचायतों की
प्रक्रियाओं में मिलती है. सरकार किसानों के फायदे की बात कर रही है और किसान ‘न्याय’ की बात कर रहा है.
संसद जिस ज्ञान की दुनिया से जुड़ा राजनीतिक उपकरण है वह
ज्ञान की दुनिया ‘फायदे और नुकसान’ के तर्कों से बंधी है. यह वही ज्ञान की दुनिया है, जिसका जन्म कुछ 4-5 सौ साल पहले यूरोप में हुआ, उसी प्रक्रिया में हुआ जिसमें नये शहर और नये व्यापार व
बाज़ार ने आकार लिया, जिसने गाँव और
किसान को दूसरे नंबर का बना दिया. नागरिक वे हो गए जो नगर में रहते थे. समयांतर
में इसी प्रक्रिया में संसदीय लोकतंत्र का जन्म हुआ. इस ज्ञान की दुनिया में
नैतिकता, न्याय, त्याग, आदि का कोई स्थान नहीं होता. यही ज्ञान आज के
विश्वविद्यालयों का आदर्श है. दूसरी ओर जिस ज्ञान की दुनिया में किसान बसता है
उसकी परंपरा अलग है. इसे हम स्वदेशी ज्ञान परंपरा कह सकते हैं, जहाँ न्याय, त्याग अथवा ‘लोकसम्मत’ की अन्तरंग
उपस्थिति होती है.
इन दो ज्ञान-विश्वों के बीच के गहरे अंतर ही हल न निकल पाने
की पृष्ठभूमि में हैं, ऐसा लगता है.
इसमें से रास्ता निकालना आसान नहीं है. सरकार के पास भौतिक ताकत ज्यादा है और वह
कोई बल आधारित हल खोज सकती है, लेकिन दोनों ही
पक्षों के लिये वह सम्मानजनक नहीं होगा, उससे दोनों ही पक्ष आहत होंगे. बहरहाल रास्ता क्या निकलेगा
यह तो इस गतिरोध के विविध पक्षों का नेतृत्व करने वाले ही तय करेंगे. शायद वे
दोनों पक्षों के लिये सम्मानजनक हल भी ढूंढ लें लेकिन एक बात तो साफ़ नज़र आ रही है
कि न्यायोचित और प्रभावी शासन के लिये संसदीय लोकतंत्र और पंचायत दोनों के मूल्यों
को समाहित करने वाली नई व्यवस्था की ओर बढ़ने के रास्ते भी ढूंढने होंगे.
नई व्यवस्थाओं की खोज में पूरे समाज को शामिल होना होगा.
समाज में जितनी भी ज्ञान की धाराएँ हैं उनके बीच भाईचारा और सौहार्द से ही वांछित
उद्देश्य की प्राप्ति हो सकती है. मोटे तौर पर कहें तो विश्वविद्यालय के ज्ञान और
लोकविदया यानि ‘समाज में ज्ञान’ के बीच दोस्ताने का सम्बन्ध होना होगा. दोनों को एक
दूसरे में निहित पारस्परिक निर्भरता, स्वायत्तता और प्रभुसत्ता को मान्यता देनी होगी. भारत देश ऐसे शासन और समाज सञ्चालन से अनभिज्ञ नहीं
है. स्वराज की परम्पराएँ कुछ ऐसी ही हैं.
19 फरवरी 2021
विद्या आश्रम सारनाथ
Sunday, February 7, 2021
Swaraj Dialogues
Farmer's Movement : Is Ethics at Issue?
All our friends and co-workers who have social concern are in support of the ongoing farmer’s movement in the country. They are pained by the suffering of the farmers and want the matter to be resolved soon. There have been several rounds of meetings between the Movement and the Government. But it is difficult to say whether any actual dialogue is taking place. Why is the dialogue not taking place? Perhaps because the idea that the farmers have of the future of this country, the society and their own well-being, is at great variance with the dominant view in the upper classes of the country and the world today. A farmer is not ready to accept his pauperization and also does not want that someone else take the decisions about his work and life. In the modern world, in the world of industries and metropolis and in the world governed by centralized rule, the farmer and the village have always been at the receiving end, forced to live a life without dignity and without resources. Value created by their labour and knowledge is transferred away from them and is used to build industry, metropolis and, as if, the entire modern life style. This happens both in the world of private or public enterprise. Therefore even if some solution is found to the immediate crisis, it is only legitimate to think about the long term. A small effort in this direction is attempted below.
It is necessary
to keep the market away from food grains. And it is also necessary that the
production of food grains be as attractive as any other agricultural
production. It is here that the agricultural sector needs major governmental
intervention. It is said that the year in which agricultural produce gets
reasonable price, the market in the villages and small towns see visible
increase in activity. This is where development and well-being meet. The extent
and type of modernization such economic activity may lead to is what the nation
needs. Hence, if capital unrelated to agriculture is invested in agriculture
and that too without government control, it will lead to increased exploitation
of the peasantry and profits generated in that process will propel the activity
in the markets of the metropolis and in international market. This may enrich
further a small percentage of people in the country, otherwise this is that
jobless growth where the West has already arrived and our governments are so
eager to follow suit.
People with
social concern have been saying this for a while that our political system has
become such that those sitting in the legislatures do not think about the
well-being of the people in general or the farmers in particular. The chief
reason for this seems to be that questions related to morality have become
irrelevant in the public social space. That is if someone talks about morality
in the market, people may call him a fool. The biggest question of today seems
to be how morality finds a place in markets and politics. This means that in
matters of buying and selling the issues of being morally correct and just
would have precedence over considerations of profit. When the government makes
a policy or passes a law, questions of justice would take precedence over other
considerations. When the moral consideration takes a back seat in electoral
contests and the political parties decide on contestants keeping only win-ability
as the criteria, it is precisely here
that the idea of honest ‘representation’ finds its burial. Those who win are
under no constraint to be sensitive towards people’s needs, similar to what we
find in the market place, namely that those who make money in the market
through their cunning and heartless management, hardly have any fraternal
feeling towards others in society. It may not be difficult to see that absence
of dialogue between the Farmers' Movement and the Government, in spite of several
rounds of meetings, is due to some such situation. It is only when morality
gets its due place in public discourse that we can expect the dialogue to
resume effectively and not to run into such dead end.
We need to think deeply and dialogue on how to keep the market away from the food grains. Such reflections can take us towards including morality as an essential part of public discourses and this may give direction to thinking about systems of society and government which have at their center considerations of the well being of humanity, nature, society and country. Let us remember that some ten years ago there was a huge anti- corruption movement in this country which brought ‘swaraj’ in public discourse again. Perhaps in the understanding of ordinary men and women swaraj means that system of society and government which is based in morality, truth and bhaichara and not in competition, profit and power. Can starting a dialogue on swaraj open pathways for re-instituting morality among public criteria. This dialogue on swaraj will require to be wholesome- politics, society, economics, nature, culture, philosophy, global and local, everything to have its share.
Sunil Sahasrabudhey
Varanasi 7 Feb. 11.50 AM
Monday, February 1, 2021
The Farmers Movement: the Political Message is Loud & Clear Lalit K Kaul
The Farmers Movement: the Political Message is Loud & Clear
Lalit K Kaul
What Farmers’ movement in the 80s
& thereafter stood for, is of no relevance; what Sri M S Tikait, Sharad
Joshi, Prof. Nanjundswamy, Sri B S Maan, etc stood for and what were their
demands are declared irrelevant today; the reasons why Dr. Swaminathan Report
came into existence and what the farmers’ unions demanded based on the report
is not relevant today; because all these have been consigned to the dustbin of
history.
The trade unionism of farmer
community (the numerical strength does not matter) seems to be approaching THE
END while transforming itself into a political movement origins of which lie in
the disillusionment with the extant democratic political dispensation. The call
is loud and clear: Don’t have any faith/trust/confidence in what laws get
enacted in the Parliament as it has ceased to reflect mood/aspirations of the
people and has evolved into being an instrument for thrusting an ideology/agenda
of development and growth on the people of India.
Therefore the call for unconditional
withdrawal of all the newly enacted Agri laws while showing belligerent
repudiation for any negotiations with the government of the day is a very
momentous political event that has the potential to redefine the relationship
between the ruler and the ruled.
The government of the day seems to
have bowed down a bit by offering to withhold implementation of the new Agri
laws for a period of 1 & ½ years. So, in a way, to a certain extent the
government has acknowledged the irrelevance of the Parliament to the ground
realities. The import of this offer from the government is that in future it
shall be difficult for any government to enact a law in the Parliament without
being sure of the ground realities.
How far can the farmers’ unions go?
Let there be no mixing of what the farmers are demanding and what out of power
political parties are doing to find for themselves a political space. While the
farmers may not draw any strength from their support, the political parties
hope to reap some harvest in upcoming elections next year. Whatever be the
compulsions of the political parties, there is no imperative for the farmers to
boycott them so long as they have an independent agenda.
By coming in support of the farmers,
the participants in the degenerate politics that has been in vogue almost since
the birth of independent Indian Nation have put themselves on a suicidal path
in that they have ended up joining hands with the farmers in denying the
supremacy of the Parliament in a parliamentary democracy. Either they don’t
hope to capture power at Center for an unbearably long time – that may witness
their disintegration from within- or they have unwittingly/ inadvertently and/or
motivated by their blood boiling opposition to Modi ji become pawns in the agenda set by the farmers;
for, if this partial surrender by NDA culminates into total surrender to the
farmers’ demands then those in opposition now wouldn’t know how to legislate in
an irrelevant Parliament if & when they are elected to rule this cursed
land.
Not very sure whether the farmers
themselves have understood the import of what they have been demanding from the
day one of Gherao for, if they succeed in rendering the Parliament Infructuous then to
run the parliamentary democracy would be the impossible task because no laws
would be enacted for fear of the Gheraos. Shaheen Bagh is the Mother and has
legitimized such activities. Not just farmers, but anybody/group can just do Gherao
and the response of the law and order machinery will depend upon the election
influencing capability of the mob.
Wednesday, January 6, 2021
A Civilizational Perspective on the Farmers' Movement
(Hindi Facebook post on 4th January 2021,
Sunil Sahasrabudhey )
The very serious and
locked situation between the present Farmers’ Movement and the Government of
India draws ones attention to questions of civilizational importance - what
constitutes humanity and how should we reconstruct and relate again to the
philosophies of life in the present century?
It is said that where
there is no village, there is no civilization. We had heard this from Rin Po Che,
a Buddhist scholar-philosopher many years ago in a discussion at the Gandhian
Institute of Studies in Varanasi, when he was the Director of The Tibetan
Institute of Higher Studies at Sarnath. It appears that some such thought was the
backdrop of Gandhi’s insistence on village being the primary unit in swaraj.
The supporters of the present farmers’ movement have again and again called the
farmers ‘annadata’ meaning those who feed the world. It may be
said that those who are not simply a tail-piece of the market or the state see
the farmer as annadata, women as annapoorna (those who provide a
square meal) and the village as both an existential and an epistemic condition
of civilization. If we look at the tradition of wholesome thought , we are
likely to find that no distinction is made between the concrete and the
abstract, between the physical and the spiritual, between the body and the soul
and between being and knowledge. Just as the Gandhian movement has given the
slogan that ‘Khadi is not just a cloth, it is a way of thinking’, similarly
his insistence on the village may allow us to say that village is as much a
spiritual entity as a physical one. Gandhi did believe also that there is no
difference of level between the evening prayer of a peasant and the most
abstract philosophies. In different words it may be said that truth lies in the
fusion of the concrete and the abstract.
It is not just that the
BJP government and Adani/Ambani are the issues or hurdles, they are of course
that, however the practice and policy of the farmers’ movement appears to say
that we need to learn from the wholesome traditions of thought (sant
parampara) and in accordance with that develop the human code of conduct. Will
‘food’ occupy the centre stage then? Is food then both physical and
spiritual? Handling of food in the movement appears to point to that. Dialogues
on the concerned laws are necessary but let this not circumscribe our present
thinking. Appropriate respect ought to be paid to representative institutions,
legislatures, but let us not take them to be everything. Peoples’ ways and
thought should ultimately hold the sway. It is humans who will build the future
of humanity. Capital and market need to be brought down from the high seat they
have been given. The farmers’ movement is saying that this is possible.