Ruination of Agriculture
It is a very much known fact that Goebels, comrade in arms of Hitler
used to lie. He lied to dupe the people and build up faith in the facts
that Goebels himself propagated. The CPI(M) brand of the communist party
is aware of this and as such has taken lessons from Goebels. They
propagate their myth of ‘achievements’ relentlessly among the masses. In
this list of achievements, the agrarian question is a top priority. They
are creatively applying Marxism to implement the imperialist agenda in
the agricultural scenario.
In recent times the CPI(M) is on the offensive to implement it’s new
agricultural policy. The then central agricultural minister Nitish Kumar
stated the objectives behind the implementation of the agricultural
policy in explicit terms. He stated that "this policy is promulgated
to fulfill the responsibility of increasing private investment in the
agricultural sector in tune with the commitments to the world trade
organisation." Before going into details of the left front’s
agricultural policy, let us discuss in brief the perspective of the West
Bengal agrarian scenario.
Though the West Bengal left front government carried on Goebelsian
propaganda regarding their ‘success’ in land reform, the statistics put
forward tell a different story.
Distribution of vested land :
Congress Government (upto ‘67
election) |
3.76 lakh acres |
United front government (9
months + 13 months) |
2.50 lakh acres |
In ’77 and after |
4.26 lakh acres |
Total |
10.52 lakh acres50 |
It should be noted that 10.52 lakh acres is only 7.5% of the total
agricultural land of the state. Above all the left front government’s
much orchestrated distribution of vested land is only 4.26lakh acres,
much less than the previously distributed 6.26 lakh acres of land. This
‘success’ also can be attributed to the social pressure of the turbulent
last half of the 60s and 70s, which made the ruling classes panic.
Tremours ran down the spine of the ruling classes when the Communist
Party of India (Marxist Leninist) led by comrade Charu Mazumder gave the
clarion call of seizure of power with armed agrarian revolution as its
axis. The party also raised the call to confiscate land of the landlords
without compensation and go ahead for implementing land to the tillers.
It had a deep imprint on the toiling mass. The state and its agents like
the CPI(M) wanted to appease the common people with a drama of
distribution of vested land, besides their much hyped unique programme
of ‘Operation Barga’.
Operation Barga is the programme to ‘ensure the right of the share
croppers’. In this regard, necessary amendments were made by the most
reactionary Congress government led by the infamous Siddhartha Shankar
Roy. The Left Front, after assuming power, implemented the amended act.
The change that the front government made was that, to eject a share
cropper the landowner would have to substantiate his claim, and not the
share cropper (bargadar). Till now 14.95 lakhs of share croppers have
been recorded and usufructory right was conferred to them on 11.06 lakh
of the land, which is 7.9% of total agricultural land.(Economic
Survey 2001-02) Thereby the Front government has rendered a
new lease of life to the feudalistic sharecropping system
Moreover, through CPI(M)-style land reform the distribution of vest
lands to landless and poor peasants and conferring usufructory right to
share croppers constitute only 15.4% (vestland distributed
7.5%+operation barga 7.9%) of total agricultural land.51
In economical terms it is true that communists do not assess their gains
or losses through economical parameters. On the contrary the communists
are concerned about the development of political consciousness against
the status-quo. Let us go through the CPI(M)s’ understanding regarding
this question!
The West Bengal government’s much advertised and ‘respected’ programme
of vested land distribution accounts for 25.44 lakh of landless and poor
peasants. The amount of land distributed is 0.41 acres per head.(Economic
survey 2001-02) This small plot of land is economically
non-viable and of inferior quality in general. Still, the motive can be
best understood through a government report. The report stated that "It
is perfectly understandable that if we want to maintain the status-quo
we should try to involve as many people as possible in it so that at
least a majority of the population acquire a stake in the status-quo or
the system in question. Keeping this view, it is perfectly reasonable to
distribute small bits of land however uneconomic to land hungry peasants
and/or agricultural labourers so that they never look for any radical
alternative to the present property system and be eager to acquire some
property. However to call it socialism is a sad travesty of truth."[West
Bengal Board of Revenue, statistics cell, Land Reforms in West
Bengal: Statistical Report VII (Calcutta : 82)]
This ideology of subversion of revolutionary politics can also be
noticed in the case of operation Barga. In this regard the left Front
government seemed to be less progressive than the colonial Floud
Commission which, in 1940, opined for conferring ownership right to
peasants instead of usufructory rights. On the contrary the CPI(M)
opposed any step that can hit the rich peasants, zamindars etc. A demand
was raised that all land belonging to zamindars be acquired and
distributed to landless and poor peasants. It was also demanded to lower
the ceiling. The former demand was set aside as the "slogan was pure
phrase mongering" by Pramode Dasgupta.(Ref — Link
January 26, 83) The later was not implemented for the same
character of licking of the boots of the zamindars and rural elites. The
Indian Supreme Court, also endorsed the fact by stating, that, "the
ceiling limit of 6.18 acres in the case of an individual and 12.35 to
17.29 acres of irrigated land in the case of a family in the Gangetic
plains of West Bengal, is not small by any standard."(Land
reform in Eastern India, edited by Manjula Bose Page 185)
Hence it is
clear that the CPI(M)-led Left Front has implemented the land reform in
its own unique style. The landless and poor peasants are to bear the
vagaries of the movement of market forces. The small plots of land
distributed to landless and poor peasants are economically non viable.
They are compelled to depend on rural credit.