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     

 

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.

The seed sown by the farmers for the change in the way this country of ours should be governed, in time they need to come up with alternative ways/set ups for governing this country. The farmers representing 2 & ¼ states have taken the lead and therefore they may have to take the farmers of other states in confidence to redefine & restate the parameters for governance of our country in a democratic way. Else, it will end up as an exercise that destabilized the extant political dispensation and governance model without throwing up a viable alternative. A huge responsibility now lies on the shoulders of the farmers’ leaders. 

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.

On Farmer- Ruler Relationship

(A post made on Karigar Nazaria in Facebook in Hindi on 28 December, 2020 by Chitra Sahasrabudhey) 

The present farmers’ movement has touched our souls. It is at such times that people in large numbers and, as if, society as a whole, are able to selflessly concentrate and focus their thoughts for an appreciation of truth and justice as opposed to falsehood and injustice. On this occasion we are giving here a very special event which will increase our self confidence and help the country and society in pursuing the path of truth and justice.  

It relates to the summer of 1938. There was a small princely state by the name of Aundh in the region where Maharashtra and Karnataka meet – the Satara-Sangli-Bijapur area. It so happened that thousands of peasants (about 6,000) got together and marched towards the capital town raising slogans. They were very angry. The ministers and the advisers of the king were very worried but the matter was not immediately reported to the king.  When the peasants came very close to the capital they started demanding a dialogue with the king. Hearing this, the king came out (from his art room, for he was an artist too) and asked what the matter was. He heard the whole thing without being perturbed and looked at the prince, Apa Pant. The prince politely said that the peasants need to be asked “what was the reason of their anger?” The king said “fair enough, so be it”. The next day the peasants were treated to a full meal. By the evening many more peasants joined, among them also those who were not from Aundh.

The peasants had two demands : One, the taxes may be reduced and two, the administration needed to be improved. The king agreed.

However this was not all that happened.

The king implemented several measures in the next six months and on 23 November 1938, he announced before the people that they were now sufficiently competent to take the governance into their own hands. A Swaraj Constitution was developed and placed before the people and the king quit his thrown. This Aundh Swaraj Constitution was developed on the initiative of prince Apa Pant who sought Mahatma Gandhi’s guidance for this by travelling to Sewagram and spending some days with him. Also  leaders of Congress mainly Shankar Rao Deo and B.V. Shikhre studied and assessed the conditions of administration in Aundh and made recommendations towards the new constitution. This Swaraj constitution was implemented for about 10 years before the state was dissolved for integration with Independent India.

During these 10 years a number of pro-people policies took shape. Three specially worth mention are :

1.   The people of Aundh met with success the challenges of the severe famine of 1942,

2.    A system of education was implemented in 700 villages in less than one year, which continued for ten years. The election to Panchayat also required that the contestant be educated.

3.    The judicial system was made simple, pro-people and quick. 

Vidya Ashram 

12.06 pm 29 Dec. 2020

The Farmers’ Movement

For more than a month now lakhs of farmers are on the roads near Delhi for the repeal of the three laws recently passed pertaining to agricultural production, storage and exchange and for a law bound assurance of Minimum Support Price (MSP). They have braved the cold and more than 35 have already laid their lives for the cause. Many dialogues have taken place during this period between the government at the center and the leaders of the Farmers' Movement. But the situation is as it was on day one. The farmers say that they will go back home only after the repeal of the laws and the government says that the laws shall not be repealed.  

I have tried to articulate the Vidya Ashram view on the Facebook through some posts in Hindi. Given below is the English version of those three posts.    

Sunil

Farmers’ Movement today : Heralding a New Future

(Sunil Sahasrabudhey, facebook post, 18 Dec. 2020)                

The farmers’ movements time and again underline the real situation of the world and suggest a way out. This situation is that of conflict between human essence and capital, conflict between a life worth living and the arithmetic of the market, conflict of a parity between duty and right with the contractors in different walks of life. The present farmers’ movement situated around Delhi does not wish to be entangled in the commentaries and analyses by the very highly educated. We extend unqualified support to this farmers’ movement and wish to say that when people in such large numbers are saying something and braving the sufferings entirely peacefully, then what is the dispute about? One should accept what they are saying and then may discuss the remaining questions. It is also not fair  to put such a dialogue as a condition for such acceptance. When one is talking about food/grains, one should not bring the market in.

Today’s market is controlled by big capital. When food/grain is connected with this market the main sufferers are the producers and those for whom food is a large part of their budget. If the market is kept out, then what is the alternative?

The International Farmers’ Movement known by the name of Via-Campesina has proposed a way out, which is constructed around the idea of ‘Food Sovereignty’. Sovereignty includes a just balance and coordination between duties and rights. It may be reasonable to think that it is a duty of the farmers to fulfill the food needs of their area. However the condition necessary for this requires that the governments do their part. When the governments do not do their part, then the human network around food/grains breaks down and the market enters forcibly. 

The three laws made by the Central Government recently take the country in this direction of bringing in the market forcefully in the arena of agriculture. The relationship between food and humans becomes less important and new opportunities come into existence for expanding the role of capital and market in the agricultural sector. It is necessary that the government take back these laws  and then there be a dialogue which is not around capital, market and profit and the so called development but around the questions of human life being livable and non-acceptability of the situation where grain is there but no food.

We may expect far reaching results if agriculture is made entirely a subject of state governments with a rider that they create conditions favorable for the farmers to assume the responsibility of feeding the people of their region. It is a farmers’ country, it is a farmers’ world, and if not, it ought to be so. Villages need to come alive across the globe. In this lies the future of humanity.  

Dialogue in Vidya Ashram, Sarnath  

          (Sunil Sahasrabudhey, facebookpost, 21 Dec. 2020)             

On Sunday 20^th Dec. 2020 homage was paid to the martyrs of the farmers’ movement. Some of us came together at 12 and stood up for a two minute silence. The number of martyrs is increasing by the day and it was felt that such sacrifice cannot go in vain.  A discussion followed on the nature and extent of the contribution being made by this farmers’ movement to the future of India.

Those who came together to build this Vidya Ashram have been active in the Farmers’ Movement since the late 1970s. Different persons played active roles in different states like Tamil Nadu, Karnataka, Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana and Punjab. We published a magazine called Mazdoor Kisan Neeti in Hindi to take the message of the Farmers’ Movement to the middle classes, mainly to those with social concerns. The magazine played an important role of coordination in that Farmers’ Movement of national spread. We had found that the Farmers’ Movement drew its inspirations from Swadeshi Darshan. Wide spread discussions took place, then, on the role of the farmer in society and what conditions needed to be created towards that end. It is in this milieu that the idea of lokavidya germinated and took shape which took the message of the Farmers’ Movement to the world of knowledge and at a philosophical level.

The Farmers’ Movement earlier and the present one too, demand a political solution.

The discussion at the Vidya Ashram focused on the fact that in the modern world farming has always been a deficit operation. And that this is kept so by the Central Government for the value transfer required for capital accumulation. Farming is already a deficit operation and these new laws will increase the deficit 2-3 folds in addition to promoting corporate intervention in agriculture.

1.      Therefore it is necessary for the life of the farmers that these laws are taken back. Further a national dialogue needs to be initiated for building policies and structures that would liberate farming from being a deficit operation. This means a new relationship between industry and agriculture, a friendly relationship which will grant an equal economic and social status to agriculture, equal to that of industry.

2.      This requires that ----

·        The knowledge of the farming community be given a status equal to university knowledge.

·        Also that agriculture must be made completely a subject of the States and the Center provide the financial wherewithal to the States, for them to fulfill this responsibility. Then laws like the present one will not be enacted. And if they are enacted, then if a million farmers encircle the state capital, no state government would dare do what the Central Government is doing today.

·        It is a matter of political imagination. Governance must be at the state level. And the Center work as the coordinating agency. In place of centralized systems, those units and systems of governance must be given priority, which are close to the people. 

The King and the Farmer

(Sunil Sahasrabudhey, facebookpost, 25 Dec. 2020)

It is often said that king and his supporters do not know that they do not know. They think that they know.

And those who live ordinary lives, those who daily face the reality of life, those who do not live with arrogance under the toxicity of power or knowledge, they often do not know that they know. And even if they know that they know, they do not have such recognition in the public realm.

The solution of this paradoxical situation demands a radical political intervention. This is perhaps the first step in today’s situation towards social reform or social transformation.

The government is saying that the farmers do not understand the implication of the newly enacted three farm laws covering production, storage and exchange. The farmers are saying that these laws will lead to their oppression and a multi-fold increase in the losses they incur in the farming activity which is already a deficit operation. In an age when Institutes of Agricultural Sciences organize training programs to teach farmers how to do agriculture, there ought to be no surprise if the rulers and their supporters say that the farmers do not understand.

 In the latter half of the 19^th century the British Raj commissioned a detailed study and survey of Indian agriculture, for they wanted to reform and improve agriculture such that it yielded greater revenue and also developed as a market for the new chemical inputs of agriculture for whose production new industry had already come up in England in the wake of the chemical transformation of agriculture. This survey concluded that the Indian farmer had detailed knowledge of every aspect of agriculture – soil, fertility, the environment /nature, seeds, organization of production and uses of the produce etc., that he did his job with greatest of efficiency, and that there was no scope for suggestions from outside for improvement of agriculture here. And further that improvement could be expected by sharing of knowledge and dialogue between farmers of different regions.

Those who know him/her - the farmer household - have always subscribed to the view that the Indian farmers have great knowledge of his karma (activity) and the organization of life as such. The leaders of farmers’ movement have said this for decades since the beginning of the movement that if the government ensures a just price for their produce, the farmers can show levels of production that would not be achievable by any external intervention. From whichever angel you approach ---  national need, needs of the poor, regional needs or the needs of the environment, the farmer has the detailed knowledge of the desired agriculture.

It is not the government's job to intervene in agriculture, the government ought to create those conditions which the farmers ask for.