India is under the spell of socialism. It has fooled common man and capitalist alike

‘What good are ample wages to a worker if he cannot buy property by judicious saving? And who would like to trade freedom for bread alone?’ asked HR Pasricha in 1974.

Representational image | Commons

INDIAN socialism, as now practised, is a very esoteric faith not unlike mysticism. The apostles of the faith have, very cleverly and probably intentionally, kept it shrouded in mystery refusing to enlighten even the novitiates, let alone the general public. At some stage, the novitiates learn the inner truth of the faith, but more from example than precept.

The common man may, therefore, be forgiven if he comes to attach several and different meanings to the faith—each one according to his need. In fact, it has come to mean many things to different people and different things to many people. In general, the people have become convinced that the heaven of socialism can be easily attained by means of nationalisation. Limits of nationalisation have never been clearly delineated for the obvious reason that there need be no limit at all, and also, because this nebulous state of affairs suits the apostles eminently. It keeps the owners of filthy lucre on tenterhooks, in fear and anxiety about the future. At the time of elections, it enables the apostles to squeeze money out of the money-bags—black money which they have enabled and encouraged them to accumulate by an ingeniously designed system of controls. That, however, is only a bye-product of socialism.

To simplify matters, it could be stated that if the element of social welfare (which an intelligent capitalist should accept and welcome) is syphoned off from socialism, then the residue is Nationalisation and State Capitalism, or, vice-versa, socialism minus nationalisation and state capitalism is social welfare. The concept of social welfare, in this context, is broad and includes social justice, rule of law, freedom of speech and ownership of property. Not by bread alone…. (St. Mathew. 4.4.) What good are ample wages to a worker if he cannot buy property by judicious saving? And who would like to trade freedom for bread alone? However, recondite truth may lie in the fact that the apostles do not envisage the right of the worker to ask for more than a living wage.

Socialism—a nirvana?

The common man in India has been encouraged vicariously to believe that socialism is the ultimate remedy, the panacea, for all his misfortunes. Whenever that ill-founded faith shows signs of flagging, a recourse is had to a fresh act of nationalisation to boost his faith and morale. The same trick is equally handy for an emerging apostle to project himself or herself as a new Messiah. The common man, riddled with ancient superstitions, has blind faith in miracles which enables him to weave fancy, rose-coloured dreams of easy money through expropriation of the wealthy against whom he has a perpetual grudge. Enervated by a taxing climate of humid heat, he has detested work through centuries and looked for sinecures to spend his days in effortless ease and comfort, emulating the rich who abhor physical exertion and regard it the privilege of the underdog. Little wonder, the worker—industrial, urban and rural—embraces the esoteric faith with relief and glee without insisting on any definition. It was the long awaited miracle, his innermost heart’s desire, which was to usher in a labour millennium. It was to mean plentitude for him and his ever-increasing brood (which he hates to limit) with the minimum of effort. Therefore, the slogan: Maximum wage for minimum work.

The apostles, as well as the union leader, have deliberately desisted from explaining to the worker that work is necessary for his own welfare as for that of the capitalist. The union leader is a new and burgeoning class which has grown up under the aegis and encouragement of the apostles. He has matured to the deep conviction that scruples of any kind are old-fashioned, reactionary shibboleths which must be swept away. They have no place in a progressive creed like socialism. He has learnt and practises with consummate skill the art of squeezing money out of the industrialist by threatening a strike or actually staging one. The industrialist, upto all kinds of sly tricks himself, pays such hush money willingly. Quite often he keeps the union leader satisfied with a regular monthly present. On the positive side, it must be acknowledged, that trade-union work has provided a new channel of employment to that sector of our population which would be unemployable on any criterion of worth or merit.

During elections, the trade union leaders are of great help. They turn out their cohorts to undertake certain jobs which the others are unwilling to do on grounds of old-fashioned ideas of rectitude. For example, the cohorts have been known to simplify and abbreviate the arduous work of electoral officers by stamping all the ballot-papers even before a single voter has arrived at the booth. This thoughtful labour of love helps the apostles win elections.

The spell of socialism is very widespread. Even the capitalist accepts his ultimate fate stoically because it is going to affect the whole class. What is common is just common place. The bourgeoisie swears by it bell, book and candle, and agitates daily for more and more nationalisation. Witness how strongly it agitated for the nationalisation of banks. Actually, this particular class has been hardest hit by the crushing burdens of advancing socialism. Depreciation of the value of the rupee and rising cost of living have played hell with him, but he is too dense to connect his increasing misery and penury (despite rising emoluments) with the socialistic policies of the apostles. Inflation to him is but a word; its impact on the middle class in a poor country not clear. He is lulled into complacency by the apostles: “inflation is world-wide phenomenon and, therefore, inescapable. The rising cost of living stems from the disgraceful activities of hoarders and black-marketeers.”

Similarly, the bourgeoisie has not connected progressive socialist policies with rampant corruption and deterioration of moral standards. The crushing burden of making two ends meet drives girls of this class on to the streets. The apostles now openly declare that corruption has become the way of life in this country and we have to learn to live with it, the implication being that fault lies with those who complain of it instead of adjusting themselves to this gift of socialism.

For every ill that assails Indian economy, the socialist has an eminently appropriate corrective remedy. Insufficient grain production, for example. Compulsory acquirement and take over of the wholesale grain trade. Crack-brained schemes of land reform and lowering of land ceiling which diminish incentives to produce more. The noble aim is to provide land for the landless whose increasing tribe would soon so divide the land holdings as to reduce individual holdings to the size of postage stamps. It is immaterial if such fragmentation of holdings would lead to a steep fall of agricultural produce. After all, there are the capitalist countries to fall back upon. The godhead of socialism has had to do it and Bhai, Bhai China too. So we would be following in their distinguished footsteps. Emulation of the progressive people is admirable, is it not?

Postage stamp holdings

Russia, for example, took over all land from the farmer, leaving only postage-stamp size holdings with them, didn’t it? And what good job they have made of the picayune holdings—producing more proportionately from them than the big state farms. Why should our people not be able to get along with postage-stamp holdings? Curmudgeons keep wailing that these policies only create more problems for the next generation. Always to be bound by thoughts of the future is a typically reactionary outlook, probably, a relic of the ancient Hindu pre-occupation with the next world. And why, in the name of Heaven above, should the next generation not have a few problems bequeathed to it. It is healthy to have problems to solve. Didn’t the present generation have plenty of them?

All this has something to do with the widely held conviction by the socialists in particular, and Indians generally, that they are extraordinary people, versatile geniuses specially gifted to solve all problems of all kinds. The less knowledge and experience they have the stronger the abovementioned convictions. Most nations of the world have special aptitudes, a penchant, a special genius built into their national character. Given a small undertaking, commercial or industrial, an American would build it into a multinational affair. The British have perseverance and doggedness. In the midst of the worst possible misfortune, business as usual is their motto. Little wonder Hitler remarked in exasperation, “The British do not know when they are defeated”. The Indian has a genius too, but of a twisted kind. Give him a running concern and he would mess it up in no time—result of his efforts to display his organisational originality. The most outstanding example of this great genius of the Indian is the state of affairs in which the country finds itself after a brief period of two and a half decades. The Government is doing its very best to make the Marxian prediction come true: in a true socialist society, the government must wither away.

This piece is part of a series from the Indian Liberals archive, a project of the Centre for Civil Society. This piece is excerpted from the booklet Freedom First with the title “Blessings Of Indian Socialism”, which was published in March 1974. The original version can be accessed on this link.