The India Inc (means the big capitalists in India) was deeply disappointed with the announcement of the Government in the Parliament suspending its’ decision to allow 51 per cent FDI in multibrand retail trade . Their associations FICCI (Federration Of Indian Chambers Of Commerce and Industry), CII (Confederation Of Indian Industries) and ASSOCHAM (Associated Chambers of Cimmerce and Industry of India) have severely criticised the suspension of the Government’s decision. They termed it as going back from the reform.
This is natural. The UPA Government wanted to go ahead with this ‘reform’ to enable the foreign and Indian big capitalists to loot the retail trade sector and destroy the small retail traders and those employed in the retail trade. The opposition parties and even some parties in the UPA opposed the decision due to their own political reasons. The Left parties opposed the FDI in retail trade since it destroys the small retail traders and the jobs in the retail trade and also it puts peasants at the mercy of the big retail trading corporations. The main opposition party BJP supported FDI in retail trade in the NDA manifesto at the time of elections to the Parliament in 2004. They are actually in favour of FDI in retail trade since they are in favour of ‘reforms’. But since they are in opposition and want to come back to power and hence do not want to lose the support of the retail traders most of whom in north india are supporting them, they are now opposing the FDI in retail trade. The regional parties of capitalists and landlords like DMK, TMC in the UPA opposed it since their rivals in Tamilnadu (AIADMK) and in Bengal (Left Front) opposed it. Their opposition is not based on any principle, but based on the expediency required in parliamentary democracy. Thus parliamentary democracy where the parties of the capitalist-landlord combination will be compelled to talk in favour of the demeands of the people when they are in opposition or when they are facing a strong rival, prevents full scale implementation of the “reforms”, though the overall direction of these ruling class parties is in favour of reforms.
In India, three factors prevented full scale implementation of the ‘reforms’ desired by the Indian and foreign big capitalists. They are (1) the left parties and the trade unions and other mass organisations of peasants, agricultural labourers etc fighting against these reforms, (2) Parliamentary democracy wherein the same capitalist-landlord parties that implement these reforms when in power will be compelled to oppose these reforms when in opposition, to a certain extent and, (3) Federal system where the States are having some autonomy and need not implement what ever is decided by the centre on several issues, which makes it difficult for the centre to impose its decisions on the states, as can be seen from the statement of the Central Government that since some state governments are opposing its decision on FDI in retail trade, it has become difficult to implement it.
That is why those who are preparing the strategies for the benefit of the capitalist and land lord classes desire that the strength of the left and the trade unions and mass organisations should be weakened a the parliamentary democracy should be curtailed and there should be only two parties both fully supporting the capitalist and landlord classes along with Presidential type of democracy as in America and the Federal Constitution should be changed to a unitary constitution with states having no independence in policy matters and for this purpose they desire that the states existing should be further divided into smaller states so that they cannot have any strong strength to stand against the decisions of the centre.
Therefore the struggle against ‘reforms’ includes the struggle to strengthen the left parties, to protect the trade union and democratic rights, to protect the parliamentary democracy and to protect the Federal system in the governance.
కామెంట్లు లేవు:
కామెంట్ను పోస్ట్ చేయండి