Volume 4, No. 10, October 2003

It is a time-worn policy of the reactionaries to utilize and promote those forms of dissent that are acceptable to it and within its control. Today, in India we find numerous such forces, like the CPM and the NGOs — both of which are the prime constituents of the forthcoming WSF annual event scheduled for January 2004.

Take for example the CPM’s outbursts against privatization all over the country. It has been at the forefront of morchas and processions shouting themselves horse against privatization being an IMF plot against the employees of the PSUs. True! But what does it do in practice? In end August 2003 it widely advertised the sale of West Bengal PSUs camouflaged in language understandable only to the potential buyer. As reported by the Economic Times (Sept.1 2003) the State Government of West Bengal (WB) called for "joint venture transformation through induction of strategic partners". What is proposed by the CPM is no less than what the BJP or Congress (I) or various regional parties have been doing in the sphere of privatization. The West Bengal government says that it intends to allow the "transfer of equity stake ranging from 51% to 74%, with management control". This is a clear-cut case of privatization. Not only that, the financial advisor appointed for this is no local company but the TNC, PriceWaterhouse Cooper. The govt. goes so far as to state that in the process of ‘restructuring’ it will not only allow the retrenchment of workers but also a waiver of outstanding liabilities. The WB govt. has already put up a list of 11 companies for sale. So, like any of the other privatizations that have taken place the CPM’s offer is anti-worker and allows big-business/TNC take-over of the State PSUs at throw-away prices (by allowing for a TNC as the financial arbitrator, bringing in strategic partners with management control, and waiving outstanding liabilities). This is only the latest in the West Bengal government’s pro-globalisation policies.

Now of course it is the CPM and their trade unions that will play one of the most prominent roles at the Mumbai WSF, shouting against globalisation, privatization, etc. Their intellectuals, like Prabhat Patnaik et al, will wax eloquent on the evils of globalisation, conveniently ignoring the policies of their WB government. With the above clearly stated policy announcements of the WB government can one believe their rhetoric; and is not one forced to consider why words and deeds can be so far apart. Must it not mean that the CPM/CITU leadership merely resorts to a show of opposition to dupe the huge number of workers within their unions and also their rank-and-file? Are they not acting as a mere safety valve to diffuse discontent? It is very difficult to otherwise explain away their diametrically opposite statements from their actual policies.

NGOs too play a similar role, but from a different angle. While the CPM make a pretense of being for socialism, the big bosses of the NGOs vehemently oppose socialism and communism. They have no concrete alternative to globalisation, avoid struggle and concentrate on ‘development’, are against organised resistance, and are funded by the very promoters of imperialist globalisation. Yet, their anti-globalisation rhetoric attracts large sections of well-meaning intellectuals and grass-roots activists and dissipate their energies in activities that, let alone being against globalisation, actually helps give globalisation a human face. They too act as a safety valve from a different angle.

Yet, on one point the two — i.e. the NGOs and the social democrats like the CPM who are now part of the ruling-class — are strongly united. Both are vehemently opposed to the most consistent fighters against imperialist globalisation and war — the revolutionary Marxists. The NGOs consciously scheme to keep them at arms length and continue a tirade against so-called totalitarianism, statism, class-struggle, etc. The CPM is of course pre-occupied with arresting, torturing and even killing revolutionaries in West Bengal, just like any other reactionary.

What then constitutes genuine anti-globalisation? What is the touch-stone on which one can ascertain whether an organisation or individual is genuinely anti-globalisation or not? The only test is whether their concrete practice matches their words. Globalisation has had such a disastrous impact on the lives of the people in the country; it has become such a blatant and rabid tool of big-business and the TNCs; that no organisation can gain even an iota of credibility without some anti-globalisation rhetoric. Even the RSS fanatics, whose outfits like the VHP are the most rabid pro-US, pro-Zionist force in the country, have their Swadeshi Jagran Manch and Dattopant Thengadis who, off and on, make a show of anti-globalisation, in order to dupe their cadre who have been nurtured on a fake anti-foreign (mostly turned anti-Muslim) ‘nationalism’, and their union rank-and-file who are badly hit by the pro-globalisation policies of their own government.

In today’s context, anti-globalisation means attacking any and every manifestation of imperialist policy/action in our country or in the world. The form of struggle may be non-violent or violent. Both are legitimate, as imperialism itself is the most violent, oppressive, hegemonistic and ruthless force in the world today (witness Iraq). There can be no bar on violent opposition to a monster. The need is for a wide mobilization of the masses of the country to vehemently fight against imperialist control and domination. It is only when the overwhelming masses rise in opposition that the foundations of imperialist neo-colonial rule will get shaken. The attack may be in the form of fighting against the policies of ‘economic reforms’, boycotting foreign goods or their symbols like Coke and Pepsi, building up mass discontent against the increasing infringement of the sovereignty of our country, etc. Or it could take more violent forms, like blackening TNC advertisements, physical attacks on TNCs and their institutions, publicly parading their ‘Indian’ agents in tribunals of the people and demanding their money in Swiss/foreign banks be handed over, kicking foreign imperialists out and forcing the closure of their offices (like the FBI in Delhi), etc. etc.

Whatever may be the form of struggle, what is most important is that all these varied streams must merge into one mighty river of anti-imperialist struggle, whose back-bone can only be that of the communist revolutionaries (CRs) who are the most consistent and thorough-going anti-imperialist fighters in the country. It is precisely here that the NGOs and the social-democrats play their negative role as they seek to drive a wedge between the most consistent anti-imperialist fighters and all the others. They, by their aggressive campaign against real socialism and revolutionary communism, seek to put the revolutionary forces on the defensive and isolate them from the mainstream of the democratic movement. In this atmosphere the CRs too often go on the defensive, forgetting that any genuine democrat must respect the views of others, including those of the CRs. The need of the hour is for the revolutionary forces to assert their politics within the democratic movement and not be apologetic about their identity.

Today, there is urgent need to bridge this gap by forging closer links between the revolutionaries and the democrats through an intensification of the struggle against imperialist globalisation and war, and in the process, exposing the fake elements within the movement. In the light of the vast mobilization taking place in the country and the world for the fourth WSF annual event, which will take place in Mumbai in January 2004, People’s March will henceforth have a regular article in each forthcoming issue of the magazine on the question of imperialist globalisation and war and the attitude of various forces towards it. One such article was already printed in the April/May issue. In this issue we print an article by Nitin on the NGOs and the WSF, which will appear in two parts.

<Top>